Juliate

5 ms·

1.
by Juliate 11d ago
"technically".
2.
by Juliate 12d ago
The thing is that you are assigning intent ("realizes", "its goal", "tried to trick", etc.) where it is at most mechanical and consequential. A factory robot has no intent, it has a program and a purpose, all d
3.
by Juliate 12d ago
I am indeed (and so are you) as autonomous as long as society keeps functioning. Our chances of survival without society are... not great. And as you speak of fire: as a technology, it's been used (for good and bad uses) by humans long
4.
by Juliate 12d ago
AI is as autonomous as a dishwasher: someone’s in charge of keeping the power plug in, and of maintaining it.
5.
by Juliate 13d ago
Reading/assigning intent to agents, where it is merely mechanical (or structural) sounds a bit dismissive of the responsibility of the builders of these tools/agents.
6.
by Juliate 15d ago
« Raising the bar » makes literally no sense, but only if you consider a tiny segment of activities within the arts that’s about consumption, promotion and purchase.
7.
by Juliate 18d ago
2026 Summer in Europe signals something like the past centuries are not really representatives of the challenges we face to be able to sustain agriculture as we did before. Between fruits and vegetables that literally dried up to the Sun (w
8.
by Juliate 18d ago
Cities being resilient is one thing. It won't contribute to make agriculture resilient.
9.
by Juliate 29d ago
There is a GitHub repo with updates: https://github.com/twelve-factor/twelve-factor
10.
by Juliate 1mo ago
For a very specific frame of time, and a very specific definition of "return". Looking back at history, most, if not all marvels of the world have been built without a ROI lens.
11.
by Juliate 1mo ago
If you only see life throuh a ROI lens…
12.
by Juliate 1mo ago
That’s not aspirational, that’s their very original purpose, which lands in their name.
13.
by Juliate 1mo ago
> then there aren't enough jobs in any market for the students on their courses. That has always been the case, because the purpose of universities is not feeding the market with workers or founders, it's feeding society with e
14.
by Juliate 1mo ago
> There are many implementations of sin, but no matter which one you look at… I’ve had a brief moment of hope, forgetting the point was about mathematics.
15.
by Juliate 1mo ago
How would this make any sense or even stand in front of a judge?
16.
by Juliate 3mo ago
Back in the days, the webring idea wasn’t driven by popularity groups and metrics but by affinity, from the perspective of authors. A ring was thematic, friends, interest.
17.
by Juliate 3mo ago
Very bad UI choice on mobile. Next to unreadable.
18.
by Juliate 3mo ago
Why should any be exclusive of the other? My take is that it is kind of exclusive today, because the economy is designed and limited against the ecology, but that's not a fundamental given. It comes down from the choice of humanity to
19.
by Juliate 3mo ago
What is it actually? Is it giving status, or taste? Is it private or is it spying? Is it giving help in everyday life, that no other existing experience can replace? Is it a platform for developers to find a killer app? At this price level?
20.
by Juliate 3mo ago
I understand the website doesn't address users first, but it really feels like a missed opportunity to show a typical, simple use case in the front page (as in, "as a user, what's in it for me?"). A quickstart link is bu
21.
by Juliate 4mo ago
There are good GUI editors for XML?
22.
by Juliate 6mo ago
Evil has a motive (defensive or offensive). Stupidity has none. You can derail stupid towards something. Even de-stupid it. That does not work with motivated people, even less evil ones.
23.
by Juliate 6mo ago
Because he was stupid, and not evil.
24.
by Juliate 6mo ago
The satire we need today is how we sort it out.
25.
by Juliate 6mo ago
I'm sorry if that sounded disparaging. I totally get that face recognition is an issue for some. And that some tech may be of help with that. But if said tech implies putting everyone at risk (because the privacy is not properly implem
26.
by Juliate 6mo ago
Privacy is a fundamental right, not the end of everything. And you axiomize progress. Although the question isn’t one against the other. It is whether progress justifies treating people as objects, as data providers without consent. That’s
27.
by Juliate 6mo ago
Rules are all made up (as tech is) for the purpose of enabling society and lowering suffering. Who was harmed? Everyone whose private personal information have been leaked without consent. Who was harmed? Who have been manipulated into voti
28.
by Juliate 6mo ago
Saying ja/oui to something, is saying nein/non to something else. If all you have is taking sides with what ought to be dismissed, or rather, discussed and controlled, rather than let alone wild at the expense of most people, that
29.
by Juliate 6mo ago
How can we still believe in the trust idea when 1/ accidental leaks happen every single day and 2/ corporations do not even hide any more their intent and uses of the collected data? (Pokemon Go being the « funniest » recent one)
30.
by Juliate 6mo ago
Comparing a natural ability to some kind of privacy-violating skill sounds a bit a hard sell. Kind of like selling hard won skills as some kind of gate keeping. Improving the quality of life of people cannot be done at the expense of the ba

More ›