matrix87

4 ms·

1.
by matrix87 13d ago
Apparently they used facebook to incite backlash against the Indian government to bully them into allowing their Internet.org initiative to continue there (essentially a stripped down, anti-net-neutrality version of the internet which only
2.
by matrix87 13d ago
> but it's that Cambridge Analytica wasn't Facebook's fault (users willingly granted access), but it was their problem. In Careless People, they mentioned that this was a strategy they wanted to employ: They wanted faceboo
3.
by matrix87 1mo ago
If I cut my leg off with a chainsaw, am I addicted to the chainsaw? I think what matters is the intent of the design. E.g. if they design the product to make you need more of it (while it has an actively detrimental effect)
4.
by matrix87 1mo ago
But a substance is not a specific product or a corporation. Maybe you could call "infinite scroll" the substance, but then you're playing whack-a-mole with whatever new interface they cook up. But then we end up with a long l
5.
by matrix87 1mo ago
> It's hard to answer in general, but does it have to be answered in general? Maybe not? Maybe if enough minors experience harm from a platform, that's enough to restrict it for minors.
6.
by matrix87 1mo ago
What I meant to say was, the standard for when we call something addictive is more hazy than that. In general, text based interfaces don't light up the brain in the same way. Psychologically it's a lot easier to walk away from a c
7.
by matrix87 1mo ago
Okay but suppose you have an AI chatbot which takes in context from previous chats on what your interests are. So people just keep talking with the chatbot more and more as it gains more context. This would meet the criteria. It's not
8.
by matrix87 1mo ago
This seems really messy. We regulate gambling because it's a specific thing, but how do you differentiate a non-addictive platform vs an addictive platform? (aside from this specific company... I mean in general). How do you "test
9.
by matrix87 1mo ago
> Heroin is addictive, nicotine is addictive. Light and sound are fundamentally different. Gambling is also an addiction with a non-chemical basis
10.
by matrix87 2mo ago
A lot of it is just fake work. There was already a bunch of fake work before AI. Now there's even more fake work. Organizations tend to produce more and more of it. The general impression I get is that the real bottleneck isn't ne
11.
by matrix87 2mo ago
> When I’m not severely depressed I’m able to do two four hours blocks separated by a break in a day, and maybe squeeze out an extra hour or two on a fantastic day. I do the same thing, it's always kind of puzzled me how people say
12.
by matrix87 2mo ago
Personally I'm pretty excited for the future. I feel like LLMs make reading papers way easier than what it is before. If I ever run into a roadblock, I can just keep digging and probing until it makes sense to me. If anything, the amou
13.
by matrix87 2mo ago
> There's a much more reasonable explanation here.. tech jobs had the most wage growth during COVID and this was a pullback. More concretely, companies do layoffs, visa workers have to find another job in 60 days. Companies like ama
14.
by matrix87 2mo ago
> There will be a window where fast adopting AI companies can deliver features faster than peers The fundamental problem is having people doing the right things. Lines of code does not equal real economic value. I think AI will have a mu
15.
by matrix87 2mo ago
We're in a big interconnected social system. If you're landing changes, it's dependent on the internal tooling, internal documentation, and the broader social system that you're a part of. Attachment to individual outcom
16.
by matrix87 2mo ago
> as far as I know, all the math breakthroughs via AI that I've heard about have come from Anthropic and OpenAI, not Chinese models Maybe because dishonesty is more normalized in SV business culture
17.
by matrix87 2mo ago
> Microsoft has to be shaking Their stock hasn't really seen much upside from this whole AI thing, so I don't really see how they'd get punished that badly. At least they have a public cloud business where they can rent ou
18.
by matrix87 2mo ago
I don't think big tech is going to be hurt that much. Or if they hurt, it will be for unrelated business reasons like ad spend going down. Maybe capacity spend will go down for the time being and the hardware stocks will go down. Maybe
19.
by matrix87 2mo ago
the market is like a ponzi scheme, it depends on when you got in
20.
by matrix87 2mo ago
Alphabet's business is in information retrieval, they're probably the only company out of all of them where the defensive AI play is justified
21.
by matrix87 3mo ago
Don't join amazon, especially as a first job. The reason being, there is usually a shit ton of political stuff going on which you won't see as a new grad. The general way companies like amazon work, they try to bring in non-jaded
22.
by matrix87 3mo ago
Imo this will be the future model: a company puts a gun to your head, gives you agents, and tells you to figure out how to maximize the utility output you provide as an employee. They might put a token limit which incentivizes efficient tok
23.
by matrix87 3mo ago
My plan is to just stay in the game as long as possible and bag as much money as possible. Delay family formation (gen z) or buying property so that the money is liquid. Job hop as needed because of all of the consolidation and acquisitions
24.
by matrix87 4mo ago
for some reason, stripe owns this magazine
25.
by matrix87 4mo ago
Zerohedge is probably more reliable at this point
26.
by matrix87 4mo ago
I'm kind of confused. It's not clear to me how or why the line keeps going up. People are spending less because of economic insecurity, everything is more expensive because of tariffs and war, interest rates have been high for fou
27.
by matrix87 4mo ago
Yeah, he cut headcount, zuck saw an opening, now threads took a bunch of market share (and probably has a better monetization system in place). Once a company gets bloated, it's pretty much impossible for upper management to actually k
28.
by matrix87 4mo ago
Nick Land already predicted this
29.
by matrix87 4mo ago
> Maybe we were already oversupplied with talent. In which case why the heck were we still hiring more, more, more developers? Before the AI craze, Musk chopped an awful lot of headcount at Twitter, right, and proved it was overkill, has
30.
by matrix87 4mo ago
This corporate messaging of "just use AI, cut as many corners as possible, only retain the essential people and force them to sling slop 7 days a week" is unsustainable. It's wrong for so many reasons. It disrupts talent pipe

More ›