Terr_

6 ms·

61.
by Terr_ 22d ago
> most minds can hold only one at a time. [...] I don't have room for anything crazier. I feel you aren't accounting for exactly how much "crazier" churches/sects can be, both currently and historically.
62.
by Terr_ 22d ago
Also: Creepy surveillance, and a delivery mechanism for malware/viruses. Online advertising has completely broken from anything resembling the traditional social-contract of magazine ads, billboard, signs, etc. They're preying on
63.
by Terr_ 22d ago
> they're building datacenters full of GPUs because they think throwing money at LLM will get them AGI, and they're desperate to be first. Another factor (which can also be seen in the "metaverse" business) is that ho
64.
by Terr_ 23d ago
You can tell it isn't, because the people with all the capital have a reduced set of choices for screwing you over.
65.
by Terr_ 23d ago
I just had a crazy idea: Are there any ways we (consumers) could leverage the (bad) DMCA "anti-circumvention" laws? Ex: 1. The noise happening in my house is copyrighted. 2. I protected my copyright by blocking the TV from transmi
66.
by Terr_ 23d ago
I wrote that in to deter kinda-bad-faith responses, where someone tries to play at being an evil-genie, inserting unreasonable flaws into the gaps, like: "But what if it triggered all the time? On purpose!? " The point is that et
67.
by Terr_ 23d ago
A quixotic legal dream: All consumer data-surveillance must take the form of an opt-in monthly payment plan, which either side can cancel. So the TV gets advertised as "$$$, but basically $$ if you sign up to be surveilled and get a $&
68.
by Terr_ 23d ago
I endorse the cynicism, but I feel that's moving the goalposts a tad, from "good is impossible" to "good is improbable". Or, in a heavily-paraphrased nutshell: Politician: "Watch-words are ALWAYS evil-mod
69.
by Terr_ 23d ago
> In order to detect a wake word then they must be collecting or recording ambient conversations. There's a risk here that we will talk-past one another while using different meanings of the same words, so let me offer a scenario: A
70.
by Terr_ 24d ago
You're doubling-down on your mistake, by pretending the first clause of the sentence--which bounds the category--didn't exist. _______ Me: "Futuristic [thermonuclear power] doesn't necessarily mean [fission], although
71.
by Terr_ 24d ago
> and you still get comments like this I said "fuel", not "batteries", so why are you giving a complaint that seems aimed at people who downplay next-ten-years electrification? If you didn't misread my commen
72.
by Terr_ 24d ago
> Any investigative agency already could trivially get this data through already existing means. What do you have in mind? Subpoenas and search-warrants exist but are not trivial.
73.
by Terr_ 24d ago
Futuristic "fuel" doesn't necessarily mean hydrocarbons, although I doubt something else would be widespread in in just one decade.
74.
by Terr_ 24d ago
> It would be interesting to see if courts object to that. It is also a measure of how enshittified and exploitative thing have become, that we look towards litigious copyright holders for assistance...
75.
by Terr_ 24d ago
Plus soon we'll be paying based on secret parasocial influencing agendas. It's now possible to put a complex spin/bias on whatever the system shows (or whatever it chooses to bury) in a really easy and scalable way. Ex: Dairy
76.
by Terr_ 24d ago
Who then share it within private group chats, literally right next to assurances that they are "currently clean on OPSEC"...
77.
by Terr_ 25d ago
> mass production epoch, from textiles to electronics I see this comparison a lot, and I think it's a trap, because it invites us to confuse scaling duplicates with scaling design changes . Duplicative mass-production was always
78.
by Terr_ 25d ago
Perhaps a shorter and less formal version of this science news cycle: https://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174
79.
by Terr_ 25d ago
I think that's just because every analogy gives an entire "second front" of ideas for a hostile recipient to find a "flaw", when they ignore the intended boundary between the stuff that does/doesn't matter
80.
by Terr_ 25d ago
Let's be careful to separate capable-of from motivated-to. Those three "can't even monitor" situations can be traced to blocs with both (A) a financial profit if they succeed and (B) some non-clandestine political clout
81.
by Terr_ 25d ago
Right, it's a chain of trust between the layers. The link I choose next to me helps determine the quality of successive links, whether I inspect them or not. When I buy a wooden shack from a carpenter, I'd never expect them to c
82.
by Terr_ 25d ago
A related outrage: Companies that are happy the law enshrines their private rules/standards, but they want to charge you for access. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/04/congress-no-one-should...
83.
by Terr_ 25d ago
Somehow I'd never encountered that shorthand before, so for anyone else wondering it's probably intended as the opposite of "/s", gen uine rather than s arcastic.
84.
by Terr_ 25d ago
But just think of how many many things you could have bought with the same knowledge which would have been mediocre or failed entirely.
85.
by Terr_ 25d ago
I think a way-out exists if we accept that "shopping isn't politics" [0]. In a nutshell: * Bad news: "Voting with your wallet" is actually pretty ineffective. Big companies know it, diversify around it, and they&#x2
86.
by Terr_ 25d ago
Yeah: Spirit Airlines didn't become ultra-awesome with the power of all its "data", it went bankrupt. I'm not sure on how much of the flight/sales/maintenance data is being used, versus simply a big archive of
87.
by Terr_ 25d ago
Yeah, certainly a reason to have failsafe timers and dead-man switches when testing new things. While I did read The Expanse , when I think of that class of dangers, what pops to my mind is an old short story Neutron Star (1966) [0]. A f
88.
by Terr_ 25d ago
https://smbc-comics.com/comic/rite-on > "No matter what you do, when we find something weird in ancient history we will decide it must've been part of a fertility rite."
89.
by Terr_ 25d ago
Similar to "needs to be a platform" [0], another variant is "be a data company" where somehow the underpants gnomes will transform your moat of stored information into profit. [0] Read: "Needs to be pitch-able to in
90.
by Terr_ 26d ago
Conversely: Feature X is often used... Because to drive adoption someone made it mandatory for a certain workflow and it nags everyone else so they "engage" with it just enough to make it go away. (Looking at you, "AI" b

More ›