confd

To clarify, I find your sentiment touched on an aspect of the article that 1) I felt wasn't properly conveyed in the piece itself and 2) Is not being address adequately in the comments here.

> I see what you’re saying but even taking cultural differences into account I can’t imagine people from the regions listed in the article aren’t at least on some level unsettled by earning a dollar an hour to read accounts of rape and label porn for AI.

I agree. I'd go as far as to say with confidence that many of them are unsettled by these things, if my impression of Pakistani or Southeast Asian culture is at all accurate. On the contrary, I could surely imagine a considerable amount of people in other cultures being less unsettled by what's described in the article.

This story happens to touch on the intersections of certain cultural, socioeconomic and moral elements. I wish a different publication reported on it.

You are appealing to a sense of morality that has eroded away from the general populace.

I interpreted your use of the phrase “slave labor” as a euphemism for something like exploitative work as opposed to forced/coercive labor. This distinction matters, as well as the cultural differences between what sort of content is jarring to encounter in the US versus the regions listed in the article.

On the other hand however, these youngsters need to pursue other options. In the case of the gentleman who saved $70 for a date, even, adjust their priorities.

Went digging through your Substack archives to find the full piece, but sadly it's locked.

An adjacent story had an interesting and tangentially relevant point as of today, though

> To understand the material world, you might study physics. To resolve those epistemic questions, you could turn to philosophers. For questions of the soul, you might ask a minister. But for these social questions in the short-term you’re basically stuck with journalists... > > ...We’re left trying to build a mental model for how the world works in this fog. In tech, we know very little about what leaders like Peter Thiel or Marc Andreessen are up to on a day-to-day basis. We get only snippets of their actual ideologies. Thiel famously hid the fact that he was funding the lawsuit to bring down Gawker! We learned about it because Ryan Mac and Matt Drange reported it.

https://www.newcomer.co/p/andreessen-horowitz-and-the-future

Similarly, I don't mind the concept of "aesthetic" when applied to products, like Frutiger Aero. But once it crosses over to what amounts to short-term identities or "identities in flux" I am repulsed.

"Small web" advocates may eschew the ethics of larger platforms, but they appear to desire the same positive feedback loops that make the larger platforms addicting.

I think that a problem for some people is that the straightforward solutions to discoverability, such as simply browsing the web in the manner you described or even what is given in the marginalia.nu article, do not solve the desire to be seen as urgently as more technologically coordinated processes.

These sort of blog posts are becoming increasingly unsettling to me.

Stop leasing new cars.

Is Wired in general taken seriously by this community still?

This is the most balanced and relatable criticism of Emacs that I've read. The points about Org is an outliner vs. a task manager, the package ecosystem, the UI stand out and integration with external toolings stand out.

This is unsurprising. The people in charge at Substack are learning from the mistakes of Medium in a way.

I feel you. The sense of neutrality in this article is what I would expect from a well-written PR piece.

Good point. If not for power/authority how else do people think that their ideals will be successfully implemented?

Ten. Thirty. Those are meager numbers.