budududuroiu

I'm not an AI booster, nor an AI detractor. I like tech and progress. I'm mortified at the possibility of a data centre being built next to me at some point in the future [1].

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bP80DEAbuo

My conflation of social media and smartphones comes from reports of ICT skills declining in children due to overuse of smartphones and tablets to interact with technology. I used this as a decent proxy for the main means kids will interact with social media.

I understand parents' concerns, though I think the price in terms of civic liberties we pay for these social media bans is too high.

> Denying a phone to one child is to isolate them among their peers.

This is a worthy tradeoff if you genuinely believe social media to be as damaging for your child as you say it is.

Parents have the choice of handing smartphones to their children. If cognition and future is that important, surely a parent wouldn't wait for government intervention

> As a parent, I completely agree.

What's stopping you from doing this so far? Handing a child a smartphone is a decision parents can make, withholding access to a smartphone is also a decision parents can make.

Huge win for surveillance capitalism. If Agentic AI is the future of online interaction, shopping, etc., a signal of "this is a verified human being" is golden to advertisers.

Both is usually the right answer, since you can use LLMs to do query expansion and effectively increase the recall performance of your retrieval algo

The ratchet ratcheting: client side scanning, then remote attestation to ensure client side scanning works, digital identity verification, etc etc.

Haven't been in an office since the start of COVID. Between being lucky enough to have a great coliving setup with dope housemates, and now having access to co-working cafes in Taipei that have genuine communities, I feel more social than ever with more meaningful connections. I still commute to the cafes, for me remote working is about not having to be tied to a geographic spot in order to keep my source of income, not isolating at home.

I've heard people on HN make the argument that a blanket ban is better because their kids won't feel it's unfair that only their family implements strict internet blocks

I'll repeat this over and over:

Most EU politicians are aware of needing to lead from positions of deep unpopularity for the next 10-20 years, they're just setting the stage to have the tools to suppress dissent at their disposal. After encryption, my bet is on reduced rights to protest (see UK wanting to ban protests that repeatedly "cause disruption").

I personally find AI art both visually pleasing at an unconscious level and vapid at the same time

I didn't drink for 8 months in 2025, then I went to friends' weddings in Eastern Europe where it's expected to drink. After about 2 months of binging, I'm back on the no-drinking train.

I think what made it stick for me this time is cycling. If I want to be up and hit the road, even one drink the night before will totally derail that, so the calculation completely shifted.

Drinking is really fun, being up to no good until 7am on a bender is really fun, but I much prefer my early mornings with a coffee and cycling nowadays.

> “AI” is a political project – I have also sometimes called it a narrative – whose purpose is the shifting of power and agency away from people and organizations towards centralized power structures.

Why is this necessarily a bad thing from the author's POV? I'm going to argue from the author's frame, as a self-described communist [1] and believer in Stafford Beer's views on purpose of systems.

Take Project Cybersyn [2], Stafford Beer's cybernetics engine for orchestrating socialist Chile's entire economy. An example of an equally a "political project" that did "shift power and agency away from people and organizations towards centralized power structures". The same system that was used to organise Chilean economy could've been easily repurposed to strip labour rights, quash strikes before they even happen or "squeeze the working class". This is at odds with the author's thesis that technological artifacts are inherently political, not that politics is applied to technological artifacts. A simpler argument can be made for cars and urban planning before and after the introduction of jaywalking laws.

> Democracy is not just about voting but about ensuring that all power – especially by the state – is used in accordance with the law and in a fair way. Stochastic “AI” systems break that promise. The “AI” just says that you do not get the support you need. No idea why, might be a bug or a deeply racist training data set or something else. Nobody knows.

Looking back at Project Cybersyn, which I assume the author, a self described communist, considers a system that would improve democratic participation in society, the central modelling function that Cybersyn used was based on Bayesian filtering, another stochastic method in the Generative model family.

In believe the author isn't actually at odds with LLMs or AI, but with who controls the technology, since he seems to appreciate stochastic centrally planned socialist systems created by the people he admires.

This makes me think that the article is written from a visceral response to deployment of AI, and a rationalisation of that visceral reaction, rather than from the author's principled views, again, as a self-declared communist and appreciator of Stafford Beer.

[1] https://tldr.nettime.org/@tante

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn

Ok, moms provide structure. Not sure why you need to highlight that. Important thing is that kids receive structure early in their lives.

Was in Tokyo today, if I didn't see the news, I wouldn't have noticed there even was an earthquake.

Surprised others said they felt it.

The breakdown of the welfarism as there's simply not enough workers to feed the welfare state.

The economic stagnation.

The discontent with the current bureaucratic and unelected elite that makes up 2/3 of the Trilogue.

Structure

EU leaders are aware that for the next couple of decades, they will have to lead from a position of deep unpopularity. This is the "solution" to that problem, not whatever they're claiming is the problem.

This might get me back to using X. I only want ML content, nothing else.

> Yes political violence is NEVER justifiable. That is the one and only correct answer if you wish to live in a modern society.

Political violence is a daily occurrence in modern society. You find it acceptable because it is sanctioned.

Thanks for your comment. It's good to hear from people that want this, as to understand which voters politicians are relying on for support for passing this at a legal level.

However, I fundamentally and ideologically disagree with your views on the matter, and I think your views are incompatible with a free society with checks and balances, and frankly, draconian.

From the Claude Code codemap leak, it seems like Claude Code is sending metadata about the binary that is sending HTTP requests

Normative vs prerogative state [1]. See US v. Swartz compared to Meta use of LibGen for Llama

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_state_(model)

> For a fanatic-led state to possess nukes is a dangerous situation and it may be worth it to try and prevent it.

So, when are we bombing Israel to prevent the world being held hostage by nuke-wielding religious fanatics?

I don't buy the superstate argument, since the EC consistently avoids or waters down attempts towards federalisation (full fiscal union, directly elected Commission, Parliament with legislative initiative, yada yada). Making a superstate would constrain the Commission, not empower it. The current ambiguity of having enough integration to override member states, but not enough to be democratically challenged and kept in check is the sweet spot for unaccountable technocratic capture.

Don't get me wrong, I'm completely against the EC, but I wish they were actually trying to create a superstate

> China burns significantly more coal than the USA and Europe combined

Which is expected when both Europe and the US outsourced most manufacturing to China. It's actually surprising China is so low given they're literally the factory of the world

iOS was supposed to prevent phone theft by making phones brickable through iCloud.

Now, phone thieves just ask you at knifepoint or gunpoint to log out of iCloud

It's clear that post-COVID, white collar employees had the upper hand over their employers. Quiet quitting and other stupid acronyms, lengthy LinkedIn posts about "this generation doesn't get their hands dirty" was the canary in the coal mine for what's coming.

Interest rate hikes, increased unemployment, austerity (...sorry fiscal prudence), are all tools that can be deployed to reduce the bargaining power of labour. So is return to office, layoffs, AI.

> Meanwhile, developing countries like China and India are projected to account for 35-40% of total global emissions in the next decade, far outweighing the impact of individual lifestyle choices in the West.

Sure, but that's still mostly driven by Western demand for... Stuff. I'd like to see that share of global emissions if the West was still industrialised and didnt rely on China to be its factory