NoTeslaThrow

"ROI? Return on Investment?"

"No, Radio on the Internet."

Even a cursory glance at the legal code should convince you that "free speech" is a convenient fantasy mostly used to hoodwink liberals into supporting the KKK. Why not call it a "speech" issue?

Well, sure. But it sure as hell aint't diplomacy and peace that built this society we live in now. Or at least, not a good sort of peace. That's especially true for the US and Canada. What went on before europeans made an appearance doesn't change this observation. I'll leave defending that to the people whose world we destroyed.

Consent is important

Really? I am not a lawyer, but from what I recall this would fall squarely under defamatory speech.

I'm quite the introvert. I just am flummoxed why you would build around something so much less substantial than equitable distribution of resources, which necessarily implies our bothering each other to enforce.

If you want to be left alone above all else, you can always turn into ted kaczynski.

But reaping the benefits of society comes with costs. one of them is accepting annoying neighbors and other social contracts that might not specifically cater to your desires.

odd choice to be forced to make, but I would prefer being electrocuted to burning my face off.

Isn't this a wittgensteinian problem? ie how you interpret language is inherently subjective. But regardless of what language you use, or how you intend to bind the terms to reality semantically, apriori truth is still apriori truth. It's the only basis of objective "truth" we have access to. Throwing that out the window feels like tossing the baby out with the bath water.

Imo, this just comes down to the fact that most people would consider "standard" to be a floating signifier. I don't think the idea that mathematical concepts changing definitions when you change axioms is at all controversial in itself.

Back? This country was built on taking and retaining land with violence. We just call it "property" now and act like everyone thinks this is fine. we now refer to human sacrifices as "essential workers" and "terrorists". Same fundamental dynamic tho—we just replaced the gods with the economy; but either way, people gotta die to keep it running.

Well we have plenty of records of people who did pay attention. (American?) Society as a whole isn't very good at focusing on what will care about in the future.

Anyway, it's not easy to turn oral history into speculation about the literal past. There's a reason such work focuses so much on geology! It's likely oral traditions encode a lot more literal history than we realize, but the ability to verify or interpret this as "history" in the western sense of "historiography" may be fundamentally impossible for large swathes of it.

I mean you could, but we're inherently dependent on each other. I'm not sure I see the value of building a society around personal liberty. It wouldn't make much of a society, would it?

> Anyone who thinks Google or Chrome is evil has no idea the scope or scale of what/where evil is.

There are degrees of evil. I mean sure they're not murdering babies, but they're definitely also not pro-humanity.

I had the same reaction. I think I'm just used to seeing headlines oversell their point.

> The use of the word 'insane' is a bit strong of you don't mean disrespect.

I'm insane, too. All the best people are.

> But your argument seems to be: the authors didn't pay much respect to the science, in favor of clickbait; they should've read work of fiction instead.

I am definitely not making an argument for anything. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. I'd rather have my teeth ripped out than get roped into a good-faith argument with a stranger from VC culture.

> I cannot asses how scientifically accurate Kim Stanley Robinsons' writing is, but he's a doctor of literature rather than a astrobotanist.

WHAT?! Why didn't anyone tell me?

The Years of Rice and Salt is amazing, very vivid characters, and (SPOILER) it's amazing how he ties in multiple lifetimes.

Shaman is another one I'd recommend.

> Also, it’s quite boring that these people say the same thing for decades now. It’s quite simple nowadays to predict how these “unlike me” people will “think” on every single topic on social media. Usually, it’s not even their thoughts. Almost all of them are baseless parroting.

You could say this about any forum on the internet, including this one. But the diversity of thought and interest here is quite small in comparison to twitter just by sheer numbers and the necessity of this forum circling the shared interest of VC culture.

Hey, I understand why people left twitter. I just don't see how bluesky improves on the actual culture of the site—the best posters never transitioned.

> The goal of the Privacy Sandbox initiative is to develop new ways to strengthen online privacy while ensuring a sustainable, ad-supported internet.

What a joke

Everything I've heard from word of mouth has been absolutely negative. Of course this has to be taken with a large rock of salt—who knows how reliable or representative this is—but five very negative reviews feels like it's on the unpopular side of the employer market in tech.

I get the sense they're slightly less disliked than Meta or Amazon.

> My interpretation of the ending is not optimistic - they had to go to the stars to try again, but they did persevere in a way on Mars.

Humans managed to avoid the collapse of human society into hobbesian violence or "dystopian" fantasy while being tethered to our very real society and cultural conflicts, so that seems pretty optimistic to me. There's also star trek, but that depicts in a post-scarcity world that seems further away than ever. Utopian (in the imaginative, hopeful meaning and not the pejorative sense) sci-fi feels like slim pickings to me.

But yes, the automation depicted is certainly many decades ahead of us. Particularly in a world of enshittified, rented everything.

I would argue the interesting part is that these shapes are nearly impossible to find outside of human society. Sure you can find quasi-crystals and straight lines occasionally, but either this is reused functionality (abstract thought?!) or they have a special relationship with things humans see as human.

I've been on the internet for twenty-some-odd years and at some point this attitude has come to feel like willful ignorance (generally; i do agree that it is unsurprising that crows recognize patterns. Or much less obviously intelligent animals for that matter, consensus-driven evidence hopefully inbound.)

Most people in active testable science have worldviews where they suspect many relationships about the world that have not been strongly validated. Einstein was not the first person to discuss how space and time seem inextricably related in a special way; pythagoras was not the first to figure out how to derive the third side of a right triangle; galileo was not the first to suggest a heliocentric worldview; etc etc. Demonstrating things that seem obvious or intuitive or that are already assumed and used practice is still immensely valuable. Communication is hard, and demonstrating things about the world without getting tangled up in the inherent unsuitability of language to precisely describe the world is incredibly, incredibly difficult. We are still validating knowledge that the ancients practiced on a daily basis. Galen certainly never bothered to persuade; only to inform.

It nearly makes me want to ban articles if the paper is available. The discussion inevitably sags.

I suppose if what you don't like about twitter is the people there (or the moderation), bluesky would make a lot of sense. I can't help but feel like the combination of catering towards businesses (verification) and people who don't like conflict (moderation) is recreating the same problem with a different demographic.

Am I anti moderation? No, not really. But the attitude blue sky users have towards it feels very much like wanting to be validated for not liking twitter('s users) rather than a forum for adults who enjoy seeing content from people wildly unlike themselves, which is what drew me to twitter 15 years ago.

I'm trying to remember a single moment in the last twenty years of desiring identity verification and I just can't think of anything.

Maybe people trying to protect their "brand"? Is there really that much demand for branded content?

I would probably call this "charge discrimination", which gives a clear indication which side of the party is empowered with this concept.

Still, wildly volatile pricing is also an excellent reason to avoid taxi apps. Why politicians have no desire to rein them in is baffling. I guess the stock market is really all that matters at the end of the day....

I'm as big fan of "rose-fingered dawn" (forgive my lack of imagination) as the next nerd, but that always struck me as less about greek itself and more about the evolution of western language before the widespread use of writing. Little of the rhythm and rhyme can translate directly; it's more of a conceptual translation, which could just as easily be done with Mandarin or Yoruba, if one gave them a greatly reduced diction compared to contemporary speakers. English is simply poorly suited to convey how nice these epithets roll off the tongue and why they're leaned into so heavily.

Granted, the languages I speak have so little overlap in text it's actually quite difficult to imagine translating between them without a great loss of meaning and tone. And if you look at something like Tang chinese poetry (let alone something truly ancient) translation becomes a game of "which aspect of the linguistic dynamics here are worth communicating to english speakers?"

So, I'm not sure the "language" punches through so much as you see innovation in the use of english to convey virtually-impossible-to-translate tone and rhythm and wordplay—but it's still relatively contemporary and idiomatic english, or it would simply not reach most readers. Though somehow superlative translators manage more than I thought was possible.... sometimes it feels like reading shakespeare at great effort and difficulty is the closest english-only-speakers will come to understanding how constraining a language modern english is for formal poetry.

Prose is much easier.

Works well enough to attract capital, though.

I've caught a couple of people using AI, which i found pretty surprising. It's possible people I've hired used it, but the people I've caught were so damn obvious it's hard to imagine much success.

now, AI to bypass recruiters and folks hiring by keyword? Yes please I would absolutely pay for that, and frankly I'd probably pay for that on the hiring side as well. Most recruiters I've worked with really struggle with what to look for in a candidate—the ones with an engineering background are worth at least 4x of those without.

Well that's certainly AN economic theory, but it feels a little polyannish/unreasonably hopeful. Like most of american macroeconomic discourse.

I don't think we're referring to the same concept. Dynamic pricing implies charging two different concurrent customers different prices for the same good or service. The only place you can see this now are basically reward/promo/point programs, which while also gross (basically, making transactiobs cheaper for the rich) at least seem to have some proponents.

Not mentioning Kim Stanley Robinson's The Mars Trilogy is insane. Almost "didn't bother to google the topic" insane. Screw the article; it's a worthless wrapper around a single quote by one of the authors of the actual paper[0], which is also far less stimulating than KSR (although I'm sure very validating to us KSR-heads!). just go find some of the best hard sci fi you'll ever find (and hundreds of pages loving devoted to lichen and escarpments) at your local library.

And unlike most hard sci fi: it's optimistic, the characters are vivid and memorable well after you stop reading, and i've never read anything else like it. Except maybe Ursula K Le Guin's The Disposessed (and she was his mentor).

[0]: https://imafungus.pensoft.net/article/145477/

Edit: no disrespect intended to the author, who was likely unaware of such an amazing trilogy. I am just very excited about lichen on mars. Far, far, far more excited than I am about humans on it.