yifanl

30 ms·

391.
by yifanl 4y ago
The metaverse did empower malicious advertisements to selectively target people (and put them in a coma) in Snow Crash iirc, so maybe it's really just a pivot deeper into that side of adtech.
392.
by yifanl 4y ago
"We only want to hire lucky people, so our hiring council only looked at your resume if everyone flipped a coin and all landed heads"
393.
by yifanl 4y ago
I think if you leave a product in a steady state, then you can keep a web service running for quite a while. The problem is when you want to add new features, which is a much higher risk activity.
394.
by yifanl 4y ago
I assume it's not currently practical to bundle the current version of the LLM into something fully in the client? Could be wrong though.
395.
by yifanl 4y ago
Again, the drasticness of a consequence is defined by the system you're trying to build for. If you build a bot to automate your streaming so you can have 100% stream uptime and you end up with 0% uptime, that's because your produ
396.
by yifanl 4y ago
Drastic is relative to the expected impact of the application. There isn't much worse that can possibly happen to a bot-generated stream than having the stream taken down by the powers-that-be.
397.
by yifanl 4y ago
That seems... just deeply wrong? How much knowledge is gained from observation after birth as opposed to just being innate in your brain?
398.
by yifanl 4y ago
Do you have a substantial argument against Schneier beyond "Schneier is a crazy statist"?
399.
by yifanl 4y ago
How would you confirm that they aren't keeping track under the covers?
400.
by yifanl 4y ago
Certainly, if we lived in a world with a very robust financial safety net, then people would be less inclined to make risky financial decisions. The main question is how do we get there? It's not obvious to me that the currently popula
401.
by yifanl 4y ago
That's coming out with Twitter Gold Plus Plus
402.
by yifanl 4y ago
I mean, the historical solution to this type of stuff is just hardline regulation right? There isn't a general solution against bad decision making. Your toddler will drink that liquid under the sink -> you put that liquid in a real
403.
by yifanl 4y ago
I imagine being indirectly or directly called a liar/fraudster by a giant multinational is personally upsetting to the parent poster.
404.
by yifanl 4y ago
It might be a bit presumptious, but wouldn't there be a point where the friction in user interface reduces the security of the system?
405.
by yifanl 4y ago
I am aware, but my point is that I'm decently confident that all big social media sites do what twitter does, on top of allowing community moderation tools, which Twitter largely does not.
406.
by yifanl 4y ago
I mean all things considered, pre-Musk buyout, Twitter was largely the least moderated of the major social media sites I'm aware of. Yes, people constantly brigaded and flooded the like buttons, but unlike Facebook groups or subreddits
407.
by yifanl 4y ago
Of course not, and that is logically consistent with my statements that state I am not a free speech absolutist.
408.
by yifanl 4y ago
The surprise isn't that how disorganized they were _internally_. Even if it's an open secret that the money hose isn't strictly above board, it was assumed that at least, the guys in charge were keeping track of the money, ev
409.
by yifanl 4y ago
Plainly, that is not the case, as you are choosing to not spend your every waking moment to stop the antichrist AI coming into existence. So either it's less obvious than you're claiming, or you are taking the threat of creating a
410.
by yifanl 4y ago
> If AGI has even a 1% chance of happening this century and those donations reduce the risk of it going wrong and killing everyone by 1% that's still money very well spent. This line of thinking leads to some problems. There's
411.
by yifanl 4y ago
Neutral doesn't mean be contrarian to everybody.
412.
by yifanl 4y ago
That seems like a non-feasible end-goal. If we assume there's any meaningful input involved with the creation of money (mining equipment or graphics cards), then centralization will happen around having the most of the input and securi
413.
by yifanl 4y ago
> people who do things like focus all their energy on the Jacobian conjecture ... Most crash out never finishing their doctorates (because these problems are too hard and working on them does not provide what it takes to survive professi
414.
by yifanl 4y ago
I'm not an analytic number theorist, but my understanding is that the proof requires some values to be 0.5 + some positive epsilon to be correct, and for the sake of clarity, these somewhat arbitrary constants are chosen to get to the
415.
by yifanl 4y ago
If you're able to determine some subset of voters from the attached timestamp information, then you're equally able to use that data to harass people who didn't vote for the candidate you want.
416.
by yifanl 4y ago
I should clarify my question "why" is specifically about conflating votes with timestamps. I have more general concerns about voting machines, but those have been raised elsewhere in the comments many times by other commenters.
417.
by yifanl 4y ago
I can assure you that a corrupt nation-state level actor is at least as good at statistics as any analyst you know, if that's the threat model.
418.
by yifanl 4y ago
You'd have to hide the results of the vote if you're collating them with timestamp, otherwise you could pretty easily figure out Bob who showed up early voted for the square. And I'm unsure how adding timestamp helps with the
419.
by yifanl 4y ago
Consider: the number of available volunteers to count votes scales directly with the number of voters in a given electorate.
420.
by yifanl 4y ago
I'll come off as glib. but... why? So third parties can make a funny youtube infographic timeseries?

More ›