dTal

The funny thing about Instagram is that it's both:

1) One the most prudish social networks, in the West at least

2) The primary funnel to OnlyFans

I checked Wikipedia, it says in the first paragraph that there's a 427 acre compound in upstate New York. Not bad for "no organisation". (It also contradicts your narrative about why CCP doesn't like them)

None of those people are remotely right wing. Christopher Hitchens was outright Marxist. All believe(d) in liberal, progressive values, which is precisely where their objections to theocracy came from. If you terminate your thoughts at "religion bad = intolerance = right wing" then I am afraid you will be led to severely misguided conclusions.

Parent is correct, by the way - New Atheism turned into Woke. Here's a very thorough treatment: https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/10/30/new-atheism-the-godles...

I wouldn't be so sure about that. 95% of the population will starve to death, global supply chains will collapse, and the world will regress to a pre-industrial-revolution lifestyle - with the critical difference that all shallow oil and coal deposits have been mined out, not to mention many other resources. You're going to have a very tough time bootstrapping it all again. All vital knowledge for running a modern civilization will be lost - most of it isn't even written down now, but is instead implicit in distributed social structures which will all be destroyed. They won't re-form quickly either - travel will be even more risky than in the Dark Ages thanks to fallout. Even a healthy society can coast in a mostly steady state for thousands of years without technological takeoff, and we've had several civilizations in the past who seemed to hold most of the pieces - empiricism, healthy economy transcending food production, precision metalworking - and yet never seemed to quite get there. This won't even be that - it's a restart in a world depleted of natural resources and blighted by death, radiation, mass extinction, and climate change.

I don't think we get a second shot.

> I personally can go on and on and on about how awesome it is that systemd offers workload isolation, least privileges, cgroups for juggling priorities. I love that mdns kind of just works for me, and integrates well with my resolver.

So.... mDNS works out of the box on any glibc system with libnss-mdns and a running avahi-daemon - not "kind of" works, just Works. cgroups are a kernel feature that is quite straightforward to use without systemd. "Workload isolation" and "least privileges" are vague but seem to me to just be describing cgroups again, or just general permissions. I realize that this was an off the cuff remark, not a blog post in defense of systemd, but you must know that every time a systemd skeptic reads a list like this, full of "features" that work fine without it, the impression is only further reinforced that what systemd really provides is marketing.

Well, yes. Why would there be? It's a piece of software designed to turn all distros into Red Hat, and then sell consulting services to manage the untameable complexity. Legibility, composability, these would defeat the purpose.

Your mistake is framing this as "skynet vs unified human resistance led by john connor". In reality it's "human players in the existing class war suddenly curb stomped by software".

Think less "skynet" and more "a corporation without any humans in it". What defends it from physical attack? Same things that defend Google from physical attack now. Everything that AI will make worse, we already have. AI just supercharges it, lets it scale, lets it run without even the inconvenience of suppressed empathy (if it doesn't seem like that's constrained corporations much so far, let's see how deep the rabbit hole goes without any humans in the loop).

There won't be a human resistance. There may be people who resist, but the police will arrest them. Existing power structures will continue to be neatly and elegantly coopted. Extinction doesn't look like HKs roaming the landscape, it looks like human survivability simply being economically untenable in the economy of tomorrow.

>And yeah, LLMs likely will exacerbate the problem. But at its core, the problem is the humans

Ah yes - LLMs don't kill people, people kill people.

Cold comfort!

As with Hacker News, the existence of a web forum that anyone can create an account on does not imply the lack of a socially and geographically centralized ruling elite.

>This is probably the most important concept for "normies" to understand about AI, IMO. It's the stochastic brother of the deterministic Church-Turing thesis.

Your local normies appear to be oddly well versed in computer science... not sure that line would go down well at my local watering hole.

People are scared of inhuman AIs taking over but maybe they should be more scared of the inhuman humans who've already done so. How many of the world's billionaires are emotionally stunted misanthropes like this? What do we do when we find ourselves in a system where someone with no emotional intelligence, empathy, or interpersonal skills can make themselves a gigantic pile of cash by pushing buttons on a screen without ever having to interact with another human, and then decides to find a sense of purpose by hurling their wealth around according to some seriously misguided views? It seems obvious to me that a core component of the problem is the fungibility of money, which over time absorbs all other figures of merit and rolls them into one, called "power", which subverts any system designed to contain it.

No, that's shown lower down with Redmond chrome. maybe the "cocoa calculator"?

(and cryptographically signed, naturally, for regulatory and alignment purposes...)

Firefox's "awesome bar" behaves the same way. I guess it's either inherent to the problem somehow, or else everyone is sharing a library (unlikely), or else everyone just makes the same mistakes.

Linguistic lineages are not the same as genetic lineages. Populations can switch languages, or die out completely while their language lives on. And in this case, genetic studies show no clear genetic relationship between the Celtic-speaking regions - the Cornish are mostly English, for instance.

Hence, objects; keep alternating between functional (stateless) and imperative (stateful) as you ascend the abstraction tower, so that the hairiness does not leak between layers and hence accumulate.

I am not the author, sorry!

I have never understood how it is that "Ollama" manages to stay some sort of de-facto standard local hosting solution when all it does is wrap llama.cpp poorly. It's not as if llama.cpp is hard to use - it offers pre-compiled single file binaries! It implements every extant endpoint format! It has a web interface! What more could you ask for? Yet everything from agentic frameworks to vibe coded chat apps offer configurations for a variety of proprietary cloud providers, plus "Ollama". Never "llama.cpp". Why?

Yikes, thanks for letting me know. That seems like a clbuttic case of buttumptions - Of course the text is indeed AI-generated, but it's being quoted! We shall all have to get used to AI-assisted summaries of software, I'm afraid...

Anyway, I'm trying this package out now. So far it works as advertised - a natural language interface to Emacs. Pretty cool...

I thought this looked interesting:

"Most "LLM in Emacs" packages make Emacs a mouth that talks to a model: you type, it replies into a buffer. El Yayster inverts that. It makes Emacs a body the model inhabits — the agent perceives your live environment, and acts on it through gated Emacs Lisp."

Not true by any stretch, though parent didn't mention any competitor

MacOS's current Finder dates from 2001. Earlier versions of "Finder" were a completely different piece of software - different code, different interface, different UI metaphor. File manager software predating it:

  Windows Explorer
  GNOME/Nautilus
  KDE/Konqueror
  X11/xfm (X File Manager)
  sundry proprietary Unix workstations

All of the above interfaces share the same interface lineage as Mac OS, lying as they all do downstream of Xerox PARC. And all have converged on the same interface principles - visible path, a button to ascend to the parent directory, etc.

Everyone who comes to Finder from anywhere else complains. Finder is weird for the sake of being weird.

Right. We must only talk about how to build the Torment Nexus. Never why - too upsetting.

Is a "truly intelligent home" something I should want? None of the current generation of "smart" addons are true value adds - their entire purpose is data collection. The pretext is always absurdly thin. I just thought "I bet there's a wifi enabled microwave", googled it, and indeed, Samsung have released such a thing - you can control it with your voice! Wow! Never mind that you can't un/load food with your voice, or that you're never more than 10 feet from it in the kitchen anyway. Oh but there's an app. Of course there's an app. It "suggests recipes". Right.

I think hoping for a locally hosted "smart" home is backwards. They have no other function than to invade your space. "Smart" objects are agents, and they don't work for you.

Gonna make this real short and simple: it's totally unclear what you're on about. You've described nothing, merely complained, infuriatingly, in the vaguest possible terms.

That's a very long-ass way of saying "I disagree with this comment, I can't be bothered explaining why (too much work), so instead I think this user should be banned". I extracted nothing useful from your comment, which bears no relation to its parents that I can discern, am irritated to have spent time reading it and composing this reply, and also find your attitude pretty rich when you're also an anon account, and with less karma too. If you want to "call someone out" you've gotta be on damn solid ground and bring receipts. As it is you've just decreased the signal/noise ratio of the thread and contributed to a toxic atmosphere. I would just flag and move on but in this case I think feedback is important, and unlike you I can be bothered to explain what it is that's got me riled up.

Difficult and also solves nothing, since you can just point the camera at a screen.

"Doomscrolling", as an addictive technology, was invented by the Hacker News commentariat.

I understand you don't enjoy being told that your "little geek corner" is making the world worse, but you don't really have the moral high ground here.

Hacker News summarized: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdhwTXwhA4c

It's not "neutral machine-based enforcement", it's a general purpose panopticon that tracks and logs everything, ready to be queried later by arbitrary people for arbitrary reasons.