Rebuff5007

"at a high level" is doing a lot of work.

I know some companies that at a high level want to "organize the world's information" or "build the future of human connection", yet have done innumerable cruel and harmful things to society (at least in my opinion).

Note that "bug" came from an actual moth in a computer: https://www.computerhistory.org/tdih/september/9/

We know AI has been used to do target planning: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/03/04/anthrop...

If highly trained folks in the military that are literally choosing targets to bomb are succumbing to hallucinated AI slop, then what hope do the rest of us (e.g. students doing homework, a corporate analyst, a local journalist) have... dark times ahead

I wish all the politicians making noise about banning data centers and "superintelligence" focus on things like this instead.

The hype has significant real-world consequences such as nonsensical amounts of funding and valuations that could crash the world economy at some point. Until there some "check" on this system, i think the anti-hype is quite valid.

How lazy do you have to be... within seconds of hitting ikea.com:

https://www.ikea.com/gb/en/p/skogsta-table-acacia-black-0045... https://www.ikea.com/gb/en/p/hemnes-chest-of-6-drawers-white...

The wood types are clearly labeled, so its not something they are trying to hide. And i'm not sure why hollow panels in itself are necessarily a bad thing...cutting down on material without hurting design or functionality has plenty of benefits (environmental, weight, cost).

What a sad retelling of reality.

A large amount of ikea furniture is not cheap particle board crap. they have a range of materials for all of their products, and even some of the medium end products look nice and hold well.

Additionally, many middle-class families have "back in the day" stories where their houses were filled with bare essentials for which i'm sure an ikea bed frame would feel like an upgrade.

I think the real IKEA problem is global homogeneity (there seems to be a MALM dresser whatever home i'm in around the world), but that doesnt mean we are collectively living with a low standard.

Shall we get rid of the FAA and the FDA then? Lets just have all pfizer employees make ethics their own responsibility.

What your describing is the specific case of a company so paralyzed by short-term thinking that they see regulation as a burden. Some maturity in the organization would allow reframing this to be less antagonistic.

Bold of you to assume they actually have products ;)

I think the good solution is to introduce a bit of "shame" into the system -- de-anonymized submissions and reviews.

You'd be less willing to publish ai slop if your name had to be tied to it for years to come.

Bizarre oversimplification.

For both manipulation and autonomous driving, google has invested in approaches with custom hardware, and off-the-shelf hardware, and a blend (which is what waymo is).

It is at least somewhat relevant.

A persons political persuasion can tell you something about their values, and the policies they would prefer enacted for a given topic.

Republicans AFAIK have not been on the crusade to end mass surveillance or promote privacy laws to regulate big tech, so seeing a republican man stand up for this right might help you understand that the sentiment of the party is not unanimous.

The parent comment mentioned "blogs" and "everyday websites."

Do you want to make a case for why exactly a percentage increase calculator app needs ads?

There is a third option, that the content does not need to be monetized.

This is the 6th blog post, making the average cost per post only $333 million! What a steal for the VCs.

I don't want to be a Zuckerberg hater, but is there any thing Zuckerberg has done or said in the last few years that wasn't mundane, reactionary or self-aggrandizing?

In other words, was there a single decision or take he made that turned out in his favor?

$80 billion written off for the metaverse.

Think about the number of kids that were harmed being fed ads and nonsense content to enable this... this a scandal IMO.

The author of this article disagrees:

> “Don’t Be Evil” wasn’t just a slogan of often-referenced Googliness—it was a north star for teams making hard calls.

It definitely counts for something that at least one senior leader felt the slogan was relevant for decision making.

Sure why not. How is that any different that what already happens at airports?

Why are those things naturally "whats next"?

We allow bars and car companies to verify age before conducting business. Does that in itself lead to racial discrimination? I think not.

I never said half the country is irrational. I specifically called out that people in power do not care to live in a shared reality with the rest of us. They lie directly [1][2], or dismantle the institutions that would be able to push back on their lies [2][3]. Countless examples of this in the last few years.

I do think a non-trivial portion of the population has opinions that have unfortunately diverged from what a board of climate scientists or epidemiologist would say is the appropriate state of affairs, and yes this is a problem we all need to figure out how to correct.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/06/california-s... [2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj0z9nmzvdlo [3] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg3xrrzdr0o [4] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/01/climate/ocean-observatori...

Science being partisan right now has nothing to do with funding. It has to do with the disdain that the people currently in power have to live in a shared reality with the rest of the poulation.

Theres a monumental leap from saying "lets not invest in climate change because thats not a good use of tax dollars" to "lets not invest in climate change because its a hoax."

> whether there are black holes at a redshift of 10 or not is not a partisan issue.

Anything that depends on a basic understanding of the scientific process, and resulting scientific facts is absolutely a partisan issue right now.

I've been at a few VC / startup events recently and I was stunned to see the number execs frothing at the mouth about finding a 1-person-ai-driven-billion-dollar-startup. This "playbook" is probably not going to help.

Every conversation about the existence of billionaires misses the point: Its not about whether or not billionaires should exist. Its about whether they should exist at the same moment in time when there are people cannot get healthcare or have a decent roof over their head, or a number of other basic things.

> I wouldn't buy this huge set for my kids because that price tag is crazy, but I like buying some of the mid-size sets for them because it's a nice injection of specialty pieces that they like to incorporate into other builds.

Very well said, and this was exactly my experience (as a child).

Even if it is fixable, there are costs involved for the fixing. A broken hotel lamp will sit in a landfill for all eternity.

"Moving fast and breaking things" could be acceptable in cases where there is an ulterior objective whose potential value could be >> these costs, but in general it should be evaluated more carefully.

> Moving fast and breaking things is fine, as long as you fix the stuff you break...

What? No its not. Breaking things can cause harm that is not always "fixable", particularly if its not your thing to break.

"All models are wrong, but some are useful"

What your describing is already how a lot of science, technology, and engineering works!