anonymousab

One of the common meme answers is that a destroyed economy is easier and cheaper for an international megacapitalist to pick apart and buy up. The long-term profits and power from those acquisitions outweigh a decade or two of inconvenience and bad charts.

It can make more sense to buy pieces of a company during a bankruptcy firesale, instead of buying out that company as a bailout. In this case, the company is the USA.

EDIT:

Realistically, there's more blood to squeeze from the consumer stone - you can raise prices with the increased costs, and compensate by 'allowing' people to go far further into debt for longer.

> If we are ever subpoenaed, we will not comply

It's hard to trust a promise to not comply with the law. It's a nice sentiment but you can't really know how anyone is going to respond to the full brunt and pressure of the legal system.

One thing I have noticed with some newer coworkers / fresh grads is that they seem much more willing to copy someone's issue from slack into gpt and regurgitate out a "here's what gpt says", which muddies the water a bit or is at least a bit unhelpful.

Which is fine - developing the feeling of what to say and when takes time and experience. And sometimes it can help, after all - or spark a useful learning opportunity about why a particular llm recommendation looks useful but isn't. Though it takes a bit of energy to walk the line of teaching and encouraging growth without dampening enthusiasm, and spending that energy is its own opportunity cost.

But it does feel a bit different than before - I don't recall seeing as much less-helpful "here's what a stack overflow post said" messages in threads years ago. It did and does happen, but I think it is much more common with LLMs.

Thankfully, that is just a case of someone actively trying to not be lazy; trying to help, using the resources at hand. Decades ago that would have meant looking in some old docs or textbooks or specs, years ago that would have been googling, and now it's something else.

I think the accessibility and availability of answers from LLMs for such "quick research" situations is the culprit, rather than any particular decline in developer behaviors themselves. At least, in this case. I'm sure I would have seen the same rate of "trying to help but getting in the way" posting years ago had stack overflow or google had a way of conjuring answers to questions that simply didn't exist in its corpus.

I think the "in the old days" sentiment from the author somewhat divides things into a before/after AI situation, but IMO it has been a gradual gradient as new tooling and information sources have become available. AI is another one of those, and a big jump, but it doesn't feel like a novel change in "laziness" yet.

Though, there's been some big pushes towards relying more and more on various AI code reviewers and fuzzers in my area. I feel like that is an area where the author's concerns will come more and more into play - laziness at the boundary layers, at the places of oversight; essentially, laziness by senior devs and leadership.

> filibuster-proof

Well there's your problem. The GOP knows that you need to sidestep those kind of tedious anachronisms in order to wield power effectively and get what you want. The Dems needed to learn that lesson several administrations ago.

> but isn't lower wage people getting higher wages a good thing

Their wages did not rise anywhere near commensurate with the increased costs of those goods and services - the same goods and services that those people would be buying

There are hardware cheating setups that utilize an external camera+device with basic image recognition and spoof a normal mouse over USB. From software's perspective, all you see on the client side is normal mouse inputs from a Logitech or razer mouse.

At the very least, this is less capable than wallhacks from reading memory.

Even having CE installed on your machine - or software like IDA or Olly back in the day - is enough for some games to immediately permaban you. In some cases, having virtualization enabled and having VM software on disk (VMware, wsl2, etc.) can trip up some anticheats.

The average player isn't a developer and doesn't need such things, so some game devs defer to the side of caution. The false positives are a miniscule and acceptable fraction of players.

I take it community moderation tools like voteban/votekick aren't sufficient anymore?

They worked pretty well for pub matches back in CSS and 1.6, where it was pretty trivial for anyone to cheat or bot for free with minimal effort. I wonder what changed.

Anonymity and lack of accountability/a target to attack on the internet is just a huge pain in the ass for most governments and corporate interests.

It is also useful, to some extent, for bot farms, propaganda, opinion influencing and spycraft. But if you're a government controlling the "internet id" for your or other nations, then you can easily make affordances for whipping up a "valid" fake digital personage.

That it still exists is a technical and political challenge that will eventually be resolved. There's too much money and soft and hard power to be gained by getting rid of it.

I assume there's some element of being very angry that "it's not me" but an even larger element of "but at least it's one of us rich elite ruling class techbros and not the proles".

The entire affair around having to buy twitter.

Lots of information about car ownership and usage is tracked by the government.

> once a good not-Chromium alternative appears

Betting on this not happening is probably a better decision than most of the ones Mozilla has made over the past decade.

It could happen but it's really unlikely for anything to be compliant, compatible, and make enough of a dent to last.

The issue is that they are not closing the loophole at all. It is the same loophole every time, and the workaround/update is just a wording change. Just make up some new arbitrary criteria on a whim in an instant, as a response to very slow and costly (state/legislator/activist time)new legislation changes.

A more fundamental broad fix is needed.

The vast majority of startups fail. Most attempts at business will fail. It's just the nature of things.

But I think a not uncommon pattern with "too big to fail" startups is that they can change their definition of success or failure in order to claim victory. Or at least, in order for Sam to do so.

They might not reach the stated goal of AGI or even general profitability, but if Sam and some key investors manage to come out ahead at the end of their maneuvering, then I'm sure they'll claim victory (and that they changed the world and all that pomp).

I would agree, but IA did eventually add a mechanism for removing a site/copyrighted content entirely.

If they were straight up ignoring or rejecting DMCA takedown requests, then that would be a self-immolation that is similarly pyrrhic to the uncontrolled digital lending operation.

They aren't really fighting it, because they never picked a winnable battle.

Rather, they overextended themselves massively in a blunder akin to just throwing themselves on their enemy's sword. They decided to go all-or-nothing on uncontrolled digital lending when there wasn't a snowball's chance in hell that the current laws would give them any wiggle room. And unsurprisingly, it will give them a mortal wound.

SpaceX responded with an insulting low buyout-or-get-fucked offer so they lose any benefit of the doubt here. They should be assumed negligent by default at best.

Then he can refund the cost to every Tesla owner with interest, and let his optimism carry him to great profits once the tech is actually finished. Surely he can do that, if actually believes what he is saying and wasn't just doing an impossible cash grab with tech that would never be capable of doing what he promised.

> Some Teslas don't have the sensor hardware and the compute power to do road-safe FSD.

Come on now. Elon was the one being pigheadedly stubborn about camera vision over LIDAR. There's really no reason to think this was a case where the engineers were insisting on a viable approach that unfortunately proved infeasible over time.

They weren't going to be able to do it with the tech they put in the cars and damn near everyone knew it. We shouldn't think their engineers were uniquely blind to what everyone was saying when it's fairly clear that there was a top down push here.

Yes, and that's why running an executable can technically be copyright infringement. This came up in some anticheat lawsuits.

The people posting about chemicals-in-the-food and stuff like that in my area definitely don't see high fructose corn syrup as a chemical - "it comes from corn and corn is grown in fields" is all I ever got out of that discussion - but definitely do see stevia as one.

Maybe the definition is more of a regional thing. Or maybe it's just more BS. In any case I don't think it's remotely consistent or concrete.

The EU AI act that went into force today also spells out some limitations.

I think it would have been fun to require companies using AI to prove/show exactly why it makes a determination or decision, upon request, if it's being used to make decisions where we say that such biases should not be perpetuated.

That this is burdensome or not yet possible with current LLM limitations is a problem to solve (or "tough shit") for the companies creating or using this technology; a necessary reckoning that they should have been forced to face from the onset.

Yeah, widespread adoption will do that to things.

> a flick of a switch at Tesla and 3-8 million robo taxis could hit the market all at once

Assuming this is a feature that car owners (and presumably, states/provinces/countries) have to opt into, what does the insurance and liabilities look like for this?

I can't believe that Tesla wouldn't shove all of it onto the end car owner, even if (or rather, when) they take a sizeable cut.

"need to monetize" != Need to enshittify and squeeze every drop of blood from the stone.

There's a large spectrum of extreme profits before every getting to that point.

> That's just 10" longer and taller than, say, Tesla Model X.

Which could also reasonably be called a pretty big car.

> I don't know if there are people out there that can actually conjure tastes of food as part of remembering something. I only remember food tastes through language descriptions like sweet, salty etc.

For what it's worth, I can't conjure anything other than a few fleeting details for something visual. When I manage to surface a distinct image, it vanishes pretty fast. But (if I can remember it) I can "imagine" the taste of a specific chocolate bar, a sound (particularly voices) or how something feels to touch very distinctly. I'd say "accurately" as well, but that's hard to gauge.

For the same reason that you would care with Photoshop or Premier or Lightroom; you're investing money in learning and building your workflow around a tool that is guaranteed to go down the subscription and enshittification path.

According to their Twitter posts, they have been working directly with their heavier users for a while longer to get them migrated off.