bluegatty

5 ms·

31.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
While that's helpful and insightful, it's not hugely the issue. The military units are not very well organized, they don't have clear and stringent command, control and communications. They understood a regional commander to
32.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
No, it's a substantially objective, and fully uncontroversial perspective. Given that, consider consulting with another actual human being, or even your favourite AI to help ground yourself a bit in those ideas.
33.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
Because building 'GPS', 'LLMs', 'food preservation', 'vaccines' and 'off-road vehicles' is not 'arbitrarily different' from building 'cruise missiles' or 'F22 fight
34.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
I mean there's a very clear difference between 'strategic tech' that's supported by defence (GPS) - and weapons systems (Spitfire). And yes, some weapons systems are just ... 'weapons related' ... and the dual-
35.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
You're right, I misstated - I meant to say 'dual use contract'; but my point is the same.
36.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
I see what you're trying to say - but MS is not a defence contractor. The amount of business they do selling 'Windows' and 'Azure' to DoD is 100x whatever little tiny bit of co-research they are doing otherwise. It&
37.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
Microsoft Apple and Google have not blurred any lines, they are not defence contractors in any way. They are very large tech companies which will invariably have some relationship with every industry. Apple had some early contracts in defen
38.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
Yes, and very obviously so. I'm here to debunk such ridiculous and obviously untrue conspiratorial things. There isn't a shred of reality to support the notion that software is materially different than any other industry, and &#x
39.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
Because there are defence contractors in every major city.
40.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
It's fair to bring up the issue, but that is a deeply misrepresentative framing. Funding some key technologies is not the same as 'funding the valley'. Military related funding is probably less than a few % of the financing b
41.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
Good point, but there's a very big difference between dual use tech that gets it's start in the military, vs building weapons systems. Silicon, GPS, the Internet, nuclear power, most of rocketry and space etc., I think most would
42.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
Well done and the author is just scratching the surface ...
43.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
You're right!
44.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
They are not 'normies' - we're just 'nerds'. You're driving a home kit car, they're driving something out of the factory. Eventually - we'll probably drive factory variations as well.
45.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
No sarcasm. Maybe slightly odd is how anyone could possibly think I was being sarcastic. :) I'm not attacking you here or anything :) I'm just a bit shocked at how cynical people can be. The thought would not cross my mind ... and
46.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
Here is a guy tweaking photos of 'girls on a beach' in 1990 with Photoshop, which anyone can use to do, relatively easily ... ... for almost the last 40 years "a deliberately deceitful and malicious comment." This is a
47.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
This is the most normal thing, and this is the best example AI is: 'my wife wanted better lighting in our reno pic thingy' This is healthy and way in the range of normal, not dystopian.
48.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
"if you want a silly pic with ur kids, just pay someone on fiver. it will be only slightly more expensive and likely far more exciting for kids as " ??? You mean to imply there's something 'more authentic' about pay
49.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
The weirdly narrow and cynical purview of your example proves my point. It echos sentiments of painters, intellectuals and odd religious moralists and other rabble rousers who spent decades raving against 'tHe eVIL pHoToGRaPH' in
50.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
The 'environmental' consideration is much less than the argument over 'paper or plastic'. That's going to be an issue of regulation and cost - not some arbitrary decision over 'whether I should make an image or
51.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
This an oddly cynical comment, that I think says more about the observer than the observed. People are having fun making images. Like they do all sorts of things on the web. Making an image is as simple as visiting a web-page. That's i
52.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
This such a ridiculous comment. It feels like it was written by 'Dwight Schrute'. ---> First - the notes about language are completely glib. It's perfectly acceptable for someone to use personal tone. "> After thin
53.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
"eak Microsoft is going to fix this given "it's 100% on him?" A" ? The CEO doesn't do the work, they assume and allocate responsibility. It's 100% 'on Gates' because he failed to engender the rig
54.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
He bypassed the new CEO, that's the really ugly one there. That's borderline backstabby.
55.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
This is not about candor, it's about framing and respecting what kind of power people have, who is responsible for what. "Hey gang - I know I'm not Dear Leader anymore - and - I don't want to get in the way of your new D
56.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
-----> "It’s absolutely vacuous to say 'I take responsibility for this' when you are telling a group of people they need to fix their shit." Totally false. It's literally the opposite of vacuous to take respons
57.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
Fair point - but he's the 'godhead' of the company, ad the founder and major shareholder is still has the influence. He could have either sent it to Ballmer, or, framed it better. It's still not good to dump a rant on a
58.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
completely disagree 1) sending the org into a reactive frenzy on the minor issue when the structural issue is the problem - is bad. He's also pointing them at the symptom and not the cause. 2) 'taking responsibility' is not &
59.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
Those are all Executives. It's actually funny that you're thinking they are 'lower level staff' because that's how it seems by their reaction, but those are literally top Execs. That's really how these orgs oft
60.
by bluegatty 1mo ago
I have struggle to understand how someone could come to that conclusion, maybe I missed something? The email is a 'rant'. It's a 'list of broken stuff'. It's not: 1) identifying underlying first principles of d

More ›