borbulon

I didn't say it was a black and white issue. I said it was an ethical issue, and like all ethical issues, there is a very wide spectrum of what fits, what doesn't, and what's grey area.

I can think of reasons why one might record a stranger in public, or a stranger might end up in a recording, but I thought it was pretty clear from the article that we're not talking about that—we're talking about content creators (any person making content) filming strangers without consent so they can create content using those strangers. These other things you're talking about are irrelevant to that conversation.

I see a lot of people talking about the legality of the thing, when this article is about the ethics of the thing.

Sure, it’s legal to film people in public in the US without their consent. But it’s also shitty. Those two things can both be true.

Maybe we might all be better off practicing DBAD: Don’t Be A Dick.

yes, but what about for tomorrow?

I like Tarot cards. IMO If you're going to cards to get a Truth, you're going about it the wrong way. What they do do very well is give you another way of looking at the situation you're asking about, maybe things to consider that you hadn't before.

Like the question "how will my year unfold" isn't right, it's more like "what should I keep in mind this year?"

They're also good as a creative game, in the vein of Burroughs' cut-up method, which David Bowie used and said about it "What I’ve used it for, more than anything else, is igniting anything that might be in my imagination. It can often come up with very interesting attitudes to look into." You can use Tarot cards the same way.

One question I think gets to the heart of it: how would you fill your time if money were no object? I'm not talking unlimited wealth, let's say you got a UBI of more or less what you're making now. What would you do?

> or you have to constantly micromanage different subscriptions.

To me that's the killer app right now, one-place-to-toggle-them-all, with a running tally of what you're paying this month. Unfortunately streaming companies have no vested interest in making it easier for people to turn on and off their subscriptions, so even if it could be done it'd be a constant arms race.

If I were an advanced civilization with some sort of jump technology, I'd have probes jump to different solar systems for only a few milliseconds, which would be more than enough time to collect technosignatures. I wouldn't wait to for the technosignatures to come to me.

We are years and years away from this. We still need to go from

"I can write a function that does what I tell it to do, and I need someone with engineering and architecture expertise to determine if this function does that, error-free, and understands how it fits together with all the other functions I've had this AI write"

to

"I can write a complex architecture which manages multiple data points doing multiple things."

Okay, let's take all you said as unassailable - shouldn't this whole thing be called the FBI files, and not the Twitter files?

I'm inclined to think that anything that went from the FBI to Twitter went through Twitter's Legal Department, and at least one person signed off—which, given the rebuffs of more public attempts, seems like anything signed off on was done in good faith. So in my mind the problem isn't Twitter, it's the FBI. To me it's the framing (which was always going to be problematic, it's Matt Taibbi).

And to be clear, I think one isn't paying attention if they try to lay blame at the feet of any one administration for this, this is a long-standing issue originating inside the FBI.

You're making it seem like AI will replace coders. Do you think Dall-E will replace artists, or just make an artist's job different?

IMO it's more like a coder using AI to make their job easier. It's still up to a human to come up with the individual problem the function solves, architect a solution from multiple functions/objects/etc, come up with a data model, and so on and so on. The AI just generates the code itself. And at least as of now, the code needs to be double-checked.

Even if it were bulletproof I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing, it would probably make the average engineer more productive if most of their job was architecture, and the writing of individual bits of code was something automated.

It's a lot like the conversation not too long ago that AI was going to replace managers. Sure, some aspect of their work might be gone, but it didn't obviate the need for the human.

> Software is at once a field of study, an industry, a career, a process of production, and a process of consumption—and only then a body of computer code.

This is so, so, so, so true. It's rarely how software is implemented, though.

...and there it is

> I’m a strong believer that any content produced by someone for the internet should be permanent until the original author chooses to delete it. It should be always available and addressable.

I think he's lived in the bubble too long, tbh. Addressable how? "Addressable" assumes an equal balance of power between the one putting up the content and the one addressing the content.

> Curing cancer would be infinitely more profitable than yet another crypto exchange.

I'm interested to know why you think this.

I think if you’re using a divide-is-integer check you can just assume that if the result is LTE the number supplied, you’ve hit the square root? Currently sitting far from a computer but first impression is it seems right in my head?

ChatGPT for layoff announcements

> generate a notice that approximately 4000 people are going to be laid off

Dear valued employees,

It is with great regret that we must inform you that our company will be downsizing and approximately 4000 employees will be laid off. This decision was not made lightly, but it has become necessary in order to keep our company financially viable.

We understand that this news may be difficult to hear and we are committed to helping those affected by this change transition to new employment. We will be providing severance packages and outplacement services to assist in this process.

Please know that this decision in no way reflects on the hard work and dedication of our employees. We are grateful for the contributions that each and every one of you has made to our company.

Thank you for your understanding and support during this difficult time.

Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Title]

My gut tells me that cloud-based OSes have too much of a user-server lag? I could be wrong. I don't claim to have all the answers for this worked out, TBH - otherwise I'd be starting a company that's working on this problem. I do think it's an avenue to be explored, though.

But as far as document storage, Maybe the dock acts as a home server? Either way, it seems like off-device document storage is a problem that's been solved multiple ways already?

I'm not sure if you mean me by "author" or the article's author, but I think we have different base thoughts. Mine would need to be online.

I'd like to be able to get information, store information, get and receive calls, texts, slack messages, make appointments, etc. I started with "what do I want to be able to do on a regular basis, from anywhere I am?" Then I go to "does a technology exist which allows me to do that without a screen?" Google Assistant is close-ish, but there's still a lot of work to be done to get past "the Beat up Martin -> Eat up Martha problem," and TBH I don't think they're putting much work into it anymore, progress seems stalled.

GA doesn't do -exactly- what I'm saying. It's close, but not all the way there. The interactions and context would need to be seamless. And my experience with Alexa is that it's a steaming pile of garbage. YMMV.

A phone screen is interactive, not output only. The idea of a conversational voice assistant is also interactive.

You seem to be missing the part where I said a full-on contextual OS switch. To borrow your metaphor, it would be like putting on a pair of pants which turned into swim trunks at the pool, then turned into work pants at work.

I have a couple of thoughts on this but they're more parallel than in complete agreement:

1. I don't think we need a phone and a home computer. There's really very little reason at this point why they can't be one and the same. A device that plugs into a dock at home and becomes a home computer, and when you undock it it becomes a phone. And I don't mean the ham-handed attempts we've seen, I mean a full-on contextual OS switch.

2. I think the next major evolution in phones should be removing the screen. We need to develop a voice assistant technology which retains context and can "understand" in a more conversational style, but I think that once we've jumped that hurdle there would be plenty of people—for whom phone-staring is currently an act of boredom or filling time—who would willingly get rid of that screen in favor of a voice assistant.

I love this! That talk.wasm package has a lot of potential…

to be fair, there's not much in the book, either.

> (apparently not including the ingredient means... use a lot of it?)

to be fair, 0 = unlimited isn't an unheard of setting

yeah, that sounds like fun stuff to explore - playing with different values. How granular is it?

> And there is no evidence a basic income would have altered that trajectory.

There's no evidence either way. You're citing lack of evidence on something that's barely been tested, much less had enough time in the wild to have its effects studied.

“I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.”

- Stephen Jay Gould

Sorry for the double comment at the top level, but were you able to experiment with different values for taste, coffee, milk? Or does each recipe require constant values?

It may already be in your write-up, but if it is I missed it, sorry.

In fact one could argue that the majority of investors knew precisely that it was a scam, precisely that it was a house of cards and, blinded by their own greed, thought they could get in and out before it all fell down taking some other sucker with it.

The people I feel bad for in this situation are the people on the receiving end of the pension funds that bought into it.