wilsonnb

12 ms·

61.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
At the end of the day, researchers need some way to decide which papers they should read and which they shouldn't. There are too many papers coming out for anyone to read them all. The fact that prestigious journals have a vested inter
62.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
There was plenty of demand for a "1password cloud" as you call it. It's one of my favorite features. I like that I don't need a Dropbox, Google Drive, iCloud, OneDrive, etc. subscription for 1Password to work. It's
63.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
It's become a big thing because it's convenient. Every time I sign into 1Password on any of my devices, all of my passwords are there. I don't need an account with Google, Dropbox, or Microsoft for it to work and I don't
64.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
You can't just declare that humans have a right to know if they are talking to another human or a machine. That's just restating what you already said. You have to justify why humans should have that right.
65.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
Jobs was not deeply technical. If I remember correctly, Steve Jobs got hired at Atari because he showed them a board for some arcade game that Steve Wozniak had designed and conveniently forgot to tell them that he didn't actually desi
66.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
The Equifax breach was already illegal - I assume you mean you think that websites shouldn't keep user information to prevent future data breaches. This is a bad solution to that problem. So many people's data was stolen that prev
67.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
The laws you talk about are, I think, laws about stalking. I'm not aware of any laws that apply to that kind of thing if it happens on a massive scale. Singling someone out is an important part of stalking. Keeping detailed information
68.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
Yes, you should be able to do that, unless you are reasonably certain that the information might be used to commit credit card fraud/identity theft. If you think they might be used illegally, I believe there are already laws to charg
69.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
I wasn't trying to say it was - I was simply saying that when you base an argument on free speech, you don't have to explain why free speech is a good thing because it's generally accepted by everyone to be a good thing. In t
70.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
Well whoever took the picture is the one that holds the copyright usually so it's more or less that person's data. Pictures probably aren't a good example because they are covered by intellectual property laws.
71.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
It can be a privacy violation but the idea of a fundamental right to privacy is not universally supported like free speech. If it is a fundamental right, how far does it go? Should I be able to sue you for watching me walk in a public place
72.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
Why not? I have yet to see anyone arguing for data protection legislation actually give a reason that they think a users data belongs to the user.
73.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
There's nothing wrong with "playing with your own hypothesis-space" as you put it, but it's stupid to believe in something without any proof that it might be true. It's fine to think "what if god created the un
74.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
A better reason not to fear the singularity is because it a science fiction concept that's connections to the real world are tenuous at best. Anyways, I think the fear most people have is either that the AI would be far better at doing
75.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
I really don't care if I'm talking to a person or a robot. Anonymous social interactions that are required to achieve an unrelated goal are a waste of time. I truly believe that my time is not worth talking to a human to set up
76.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
To be fair, this is from the opinion section. It's not news. Most of the articles you are talking about are probably opinion pieces as well. I do think they should do more to differentiate between news and opinion pieces.
77.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
I don't see why death should have no bearing on the decision if the risk of death in each situation is different.
78.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
At that point, what's to stop them from forcing me to present myself at the interrogation booth anyways? Does it matter if they have data "proving" that I've done something wrong, or if they just make it up?
79.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
I guess my view of the situation is that the massive collection of data only becomes a problem in situations where we can absolutely not trust our government, and if things get that bad then we have much bigger problems than the government
80.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. I do understand people incorporating their friends and family into their identity but I'm not sure how that logic would extend to people that don't exist (yet). What you're saying
81.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
I do value my own life, because it already exists. I also value other life that also exists. I do not value future life that does not exist. Future life and current life seem very different to me. Putting your billions towards the long view
82.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
I mean, more young people probably die skiing than sitting in an office.
83.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
I'm only 23 but I think about leaving the tech field every day. I have also been depressed (not sure if I would say clinically depressed, but depressed) for a while now. The only advice I have to give is that most bad things aren'
84.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
I think that the idea of technology saving us from our inherent natural tendencies is nice to think about but ultimately naive.
85.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
Conversely, why should I care about the trillions of people here after I die? Why should I care if humanity dies in it's birthplace or spreads across the universe like a virus? To me, a future with a trillion happy people is not better
86.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
The difference here is that you are guessing as to what might happen. We know that some people without access to medical care will die. You're saying it's okay to gamble those people's lives on the chance that future lives mi
87.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
Some people's ideas of what's important are stupid. Everyone has the right to an opinion but that doesn't mean we should treat every opinion as equal. If someone was going to vote on the single issue of whether or not we sh
88.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
I'm not a foreigner and I think the comment you're responding to is spot on. Are we just supposed to pretend that all issues are equal? People aren't going to die because the nets aren't neutral. People are going to die
89.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
It's possible that they care about the aggregated data and not about the individual data.
90.
by wilsonnb 8y ago
I'm not the person you're asking this question to, but I thought I'd reply anyways. No, it doesn't really bother me. Why would anyone care that I get up around 7AM on weekdays, drive to work around 9, stay there until 5,

More ›