proc0

75 ms·

961.
by proc0 4y ago
Because it's likely to replace at least a portion of the talent needed for creating art. AI is going to do a lot of the heavy lifting, and "manual" art will be a specialty. Artists will still be needed, but the AI tools will
962.
by proc0 4y ago
Well, because it's likely to replace at least a portion of the talent needed for creating art. AI is going to do a lot of the heavy lifting, and "manual" art will be a specialty. Artists will still be needed, but the AI tools
963.
by proc0 4y ago
That's not what the trend shows. Apps have added more interactivity like live chats, conferencing calls, more editing options (i.e. editing videos when uploading to YouTube), and this is probably going to keep going adding things like
964.
by proc0 4y ago
Clients are getting more interactive over time. People want more interactivity, not less. Interactivity increases with visual complexity, which in turn requires increasingly complex code. UIs are evolving in the direction of more realtime u
965.
by proc0 4y ago
I honestly try to think of one. It used to be the West, but that has changed recently.
966.
by proc0 4y ago
I doubt that reasoning. I'm sure there are worse cases that were not banned, but of course one side thought Trump was an existential threat, so there were more underlying reasons. I think Twitter is about to release more email threads
967.
by proc0 4y ago
Well, great. That sounds consistent. One minor point thought, political bias doesn't mean the platform leans in that direction, but rather the platform is actively pushing in that direction by censoring opinions on the opposite side. I
968.
by proc0 4y ago
My interpretation of the article is that they're excusing direct interference by a government entity just because they're not directly in power (but obviously power is their objective). This implies that it would be justified for
969.
by proc0 4y ago
Then great, that is consistent. I just doubt that would be the case. I think the actual justification for banning one political side is not "it's a private company", but rather "it allows our side to win".
970.
by proc0 4y ago
So if Trump goes back on twitter, and he gains massive popularity winning the 2024 election, there is no problem right? If so, there is no double standard, but I seriously doubt those who celebrated his ban, will now be ok with his return,
971.
by proc0 4y ago
They still have a monarchy. They're ok with an absolute ruler, even if it's symbolic, so it's no surprise when their government reflects those values.
972.
by proc0 4y ago
> This is a thing in most countries on the planet. Also totalitarian governments have happened everywhere around the world, except in the USA. I've lived abroad in places where it seems the citizens are property of the government. I
973.
by proc0 4y ago
It's not that technologies are making this possible, but rather that technology is undoing the previous era of centralized information when it was much easier to censor people without anyone noticing. The glass half-full take is that t
974.
by proc0 4y ago
Ok... so according to this article, Elon can start censoring Democrats and any left wing ideas and that should be ok, right? That wouldn't violate free speech. He can get funding from the RNC, work with Republicans who are not in gover
975.
by proc0 4y ago
Guess what, it's a private company.
976.
by proc0 4y ago
Yeah, I agree, hybrids could be a good transition while the grid is upgraded.
977.
by proc0 4y ago
The electric grid is a big bottleneck that I don't think has a solution yet. At some point EVs will create stress on the grid, slowing down the adoption and leaving the state of this transition in the worst of both worlds--costly elect
978.
by proc0 4y ago
Even if it is publishing, companies align in intent and wield incredible amounts of power with how information flows. They decide what is a legitimate story, and what is a conspiracy theory, and I personally don't trust large corporati
979.
by proc0 4y ago
> A key mindset I use when forming connections via conversation is: “If we aren’t both excited about this conversation, do something differently” This is my problem. Friendship seems to be a series of entertaining experiences. People see
980.
by proc0 4y ago
It's not just a publishing medium. You can use it privately as well. Social media is blurring those lines. People broadcast their messages daily to their own audience, whether it's family, group of friends, or the world. Eventuall
981.
by proc0 4y ago
This is further confirming that big tech is all in on controlling the conversation and controlling who can participate or not. Why isn't Apple blocking the phones of those toxic users? Why aren't phone carriers like ATT blocking p
982.
by proc0 4y ago
We could start experimenting with terraforming Mars with bacteria somehow. Maybe the process will take less than a generation, and Mars could have at least less hostile environment. I don't see anything to lose here, assuming there is
983.
by proc0 4y ago
It's used in different ways. I think it's original meaning was writing a script for a program, which means specifying high level behaviors like a movie script. Game engines are written in a programming language and then expose a s
984.
by proc0 4y ago
I don't think you're describing friends there, that's more like being a good human being. Friends demand a certain kind of loyalty, an involvement with their personal lives, and personal beliefs. Friends seem to slowly pull y
985.
by proc0 4y ago
What could possibly wrong? (the theme of SF policies)
986.
by proc0 4y ago
Well, they probably are looking into this because they were defunded and don't have enough officers.
987.
by proc0 4y ago
That's the same except it's closer to the "ground" in terms of abstraction (DNA is the bird's eye view here). You can't self-identify yourself as being of a certain profession because you first have to do it. I
988.
by proc0 4y ago
> DNA can express with both genders organs in the same being. Again, those are edge cases of the category, which does not mean the category does not exist. > But I don't think it's asking too much to address an individual in
989.
by proc0 4y ago
Every living thing is defined by their DNA. It produces the visible specimen with all its features and behaviors. DNA is a giant specification program, and when they're identical, they produce identical living beings. Could we group DN
990.
by proc0 4y ago
There is an inherent contradiction calling censorship = free speech. Censorship of any form is already a violation of free speech, and therefore cannot be free speech itself. That said, no platform can be absolutist or it would devolve into

More ›