jjjjj55555

7 ms·

31.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
I tend to agree, but then I look at Europe and I say, who is the ruling class here? In the US it's obvious that corporations run everything, but that doesn't seem to be the case in western Europe.
32.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Often times there's nothing to iterate on because the original solution was BS.
33.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
> represents the manifest will of the people in its entirety, and that any opposition to that platform is corrupt or elite-driven It's funny how this starts to sound more and more like just Marxism.
34.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
The condescension in your post is a good example of why someone might turn to "populism." A lot of people have lost trust in those experts and people who claim to know what's good for other people. They also don't apprec
35.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
It seems like the words are all increasingly meaningless. It's about what connotation you can give to them for the people in your base. And if you can't change the connotation, you just invent a new word. I think I remember some o
36.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
What are the other possible vectors for influencing politics in a republic/democracy like the US. Now that I think of it, it seems like both sides are populist.
37.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Interestingly, I've never heard BLM described as populist. It is populist in the sense of being explicitly anti-establishment and anti-elite, as well as being in favor of the downtrodden. It just comes at it from a racial angle, and fo
38.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Anti-globalist seems like a more precise term for what you're describing. It also avoids clashing with populist movements of the past, which dealt with issues other than those that you're describing.
39.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
I didn't see any clear definition of populism anywhere here. At present moment it seems to just be a pejorative against lower class people with right-wing leanings. It's also odd to me that they only look at the post-WWII period.
40.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
I'm all for more transparency and less conflict of interest. But what you're saying is we still need to trust the congress person, otherwise they can just hire a list of names provided by the lobbyists.
41.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
I fully agree with your first paragraph, but I have too little trust and the system has too little transparency for me to buy the picture you paint in your second paragraph.
42.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Having experts seems like a great idea, but then I worry that it basically means having multiple lobbyists on staff, with a desk right in the senator's office.
43.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
This is how it already works, isn't it? That's what critical theorists have been saying for decades.
44.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Maybe it can also decide what job and salary you should have, who your partner should be, how many kids and how big your house should be.
45.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
I agree. But it sounds like they didn't randomize them. They made it so they explicitly can't be white. Random would mean put all the options into a hat and pull one out. This makes sense at least for non-historical contexts.
46.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Why not just randomize the gender, age, race, etc and be done with it? That way if someone is offended or under- or over-represented it will only be by accident.
47.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Yes but it's especially cynical in this case because the belief their pushing is that diversity matters, that biases need to be overcome, and that all people need to be represented. Claiming all of that but then shoving your own biases
48.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Seems like the big tech cos are going to build the underlying infrastructure but you'll still be able to identify those small market opportunities and develop and sell solutions to fit them.
49.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Stupid question, but where would their competitive advantages be in these silos? Sounds like at that point cloud+AI is just a commodity.
50.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
The only conclusion I've been able to come to is that "placing too much power in too few hands" is actually the goal. You have a lot of power if you're the one who gets to decide what's biased and what's not.
51.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Are you saying that the government WANTS us to be able to search for more credible sources?
52.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Diversity is cool, but who gets to decide what's diverse?
53.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Also, these tools are used world-wide and "diversity" means different things in different places. Somehow it's always only the US ideal of diversity that gets shipped abroad.
54.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Stupid question, but why aren't they doing it already? What's their bottleneck right now?
55.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
I do make decisions and often times people many degrees removed get hurt or exploited as a result of it. I choose not to focus on that though, whereas the person I replied to apparently does. I was curious how such a person manages to live
56.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Looks like migrating to/from the cloud is going to come and go in cycles like offshoring.
57.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
I'm asking you this since you sound like you might know. At what point in the process do they add in the guardrails/"baby-proofing"? And how do they do it?
58.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Does that mean that you don't get stuff done? Or does it mean that you just decide what to do moment by moment? If it's the latter, then why does having it written out add any more stess? For me, NOT having stuff planned out is wh
59.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
Something that I've noticed is that all of the killer examples of AI doing amazing stuff are not really easily reproducible by normal users. If someone spent countless hours crafting prompts to generate a really cool image or something
60.
by jjjjj55555 3y ago
I'm curious, do you personally buy any goods or services? It seems like the logical conclusion to this kind of thinking is to just not ever purchase or use anything.

More ›