jfyi

Nope, I never heard that. It doesn't surprise me one bit though. I found his talks sort of robotic, and having caught a handful, very rote. I always thought he didn't have the demeanor of the person he claimed to be.

You remember a way different 90's than I do.

It was just simpler back then. There was no aslr, no hardware level protection from execution, traffic was all plaintext, switches didn't exist, or maybe they did but just nobody used them and everything on every network was just one giant collision domain, developers by and large didn't even think about securing software outside of DRM, and absolutely nobody understood the basic premise that someone on the phone may be lying to your business to get access to things they want.

The skillset that made you a 1337 h4x0r in the 90's makes you a mediocre sysadmin these days.

10 years and they'll be mid way into their conference talk career. You know, that sweet spot where you can keep telling the same story over and over and still get attention for it. That makes me wonder what Frank Abagnale has been up to recently.

Heh, yeah. They have always been chasing quarterly numbers, they just stopped asking, "what do we have to do to sell the next version" and took their customer base for granted.

The middle east is a mess and I can't disagree. The warning signs were there, and they were ignored, mostly.

You don't like my choice in appeal to authority, sure I get that. That doesn't preclude from there being authoritative views on the topic though.

We probably should have something to stand on other than vibes. Maybe we can come to consensus on who is an authority. How about the IAGS? https://genocidescholars.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Fina...

Now, if it has moved in the other direction since 2022, I don't see anything countering that either and I certainly can't speak to the current state of things and will believe you (mostly because I have no intention of looking deeper currently). I will say that's a strong indicator that the process of being called out on the international stage worked though.

I agree that scale is often overlooked in these discussions. The real value of current legal definitions isn't just in identifying the industrialized murder of a population, but in recognizing the warning behaviors that precede it. It's crucial to identify when a situation starts moving in that direction.

To be fair, Gregory Stanton has had the US listed as problematic for awhile now and he's considered a top authority on the topic. Of course his reports are based on the definition from the UN Genocide Convention which you don't seem to hold in high regard.

https://www.genocidewatch.com/country-pages/united-states-of...

I would suggest that the strict etymology of a word doesn't really matter much in geopolitics, at least not as much as legal definitions arrived at via international consensus.

Legal status of these chemicals is not going to prevent your neighbor from getting them and becoming addicted.

Legal status (along with stigma associated with it) does prevent them from getting help before completely crashing out. It has the additional side effect of whatever portion of their lives they come out of it with being completely destroyed by the legal process. You know, because chronic illness obviously deserves punishment.

So I guess the real question is: what is the goal? Help chronic illness, or punish people that do things we don't like?

Also, don't we already have laws for literally all the bad things someone can do while addicted? If not, then why is it bad just because they are suffering from a chronic illness?

It doesn't need to make clones into absolute copies of them to be problematic. It's just an obfuscation of a very old idea, the divine right of kings.

It could be argued they would likely be worse than the original. They would be even more detached from the rest of humanity because of their position. They wouldn't be just a person that found an extreme level of success, they would be the undying legacy of that person. This is not a way to build a healthy human psyche.

...and here I was hoping for yours.

Yeah, it all makes sense now.

We are bottlenecked at energy supply, not running hot via demand. Raising rates is likely to stifle already weak sections of the economy. Additionally, we are getting into territory where raising rates threatens our own ability to pay our debt.

Just to be clear, I am not coming at this from some anti-interventionist or anti-monetary tool standpoint. It's just that demand side tools seem like the wrong lever for the job. We are backing slowly into the corner of persistent inflation or structural failure of some kind.

Just from keeping up with the news over the last week, the general consensus seems to be "no". It’s certainly a no for me. A more interesting question is, "will you be divesting from funds that fast-track this stock?"

No worry, cool. Easy to do, sorry to press. It just seemed weirdly aggressive calling the other guy out after that and I felt the need to address it.

We don't know they were dried. We do know the strain is a particularly potent one that grows in a fashion that might not lend itself to normal water concentrations.

Really though, weren't you the one conflating mushroom dosages with those of pure psylocibin a moment ago? I find it difficult to believe someone with more than incidental experience would make that mistake.

Depends a lot on which end is pointing down.

I knew a fellow with the same idea about government id of any form. No driver's license, no social security card, no state id.

To say the least, he made some pretty serious compromises in life. He was a tattoo artist with no shop and effectively homeless when I knew him, if you were curious.

Anyway, sometimes the world moves on without you.

It's older than that. Atoms have neither orbitals, nor shells. Neither describes a probability field at various energy levels surrounding the nucleus.

Analogies aid understanding, even if on an abstract level.

I skimmed the video, but it's definitely the same example that finally made this make sense to me.

I always hated the ball and sheet example simply because it was describing gravity with gravity. It felt fundamentally wrong.

I've never had this problem.

The problem I have had is other developers expecting me to maintain documentation for their tools. To the point that they wage stupid inter office wars because they don't want to learn a command line utility with 20+ years of documentation itself.

An ai tool that is priced out of the hands of the average person.

Fwiw, I think the genie is out the bottle. We are waiting on hardware to catch up, which it will.

I actually don't think you are commenting about the casualness, but the usage of the term "stole". Correct me if I'm wrong.

I can say I view my own time in jail very transactionally and I have run into many people that don't understand that. They expect a sob story about how you were innocent, or how you turned your life around.

I don't think I'd ever say my life was "stolen" from me, but it definitely feels that way in the moment. Having a bunch of armed people come and throw you in a cage certainly leaves you with a new perspective to process.

I agree with your point, mostly.

Until I remember seeing someone saying "MCP is dead, we just give agents command line access now". Then I start to think that looking at this in the context of ai is helpful.

>What do you tax?

Physical infrastructure inputs and negative externalities.

For example: electrical grid strain, water table consumption for cooling, and local pollution/carbon footprints.

I think that I just take issue with the term "hand-waving" as equated to intuition. Yeah it lacked formal rigor, but they had a solid model that applied in detail to the real world. That doesn't come from just saying, "oh well, it'll work itself out". I guess if you want to call that "hand-wavy" we'll just have to disagree.

Newton and Leibniz were "hand-waving"?

If anything, they were fighting an uphill battle against the perception of hand-waving by their contemporaries.

Would you do that if you were an ex-law enforcement officer who's racial profile puts you under the protection of criminals on the yard that largely support the person you heckled while not knowing that it was only going to be 37 days?

You know, I am usually one to immediately jump to "to hell with that" when someone brings up Hanlon's razor, but I think it may apply here.

He certainly is creating a false equivalency between AI and immigrants, but with how tone-deaf this speech is, it may not be deliberate. He likely already has this association.

So then the question would be: why would he have this association?

My only guess is he has a fairly shallow view of both as cheap labor. Which is pretty malicious after all.

"Postliberalism" is a really flowery way to say fascist/corporatist. I guess it is less likely to shut down the conversation though.

This is a weird take to me. The current "conservative" movement has gone to great lengths to push out neoliberals and enact protectionist policy.

Maybe you mean "conservative" voters? Though, these are more likely the "moderates" everyone is on about. Those are the neoliberals on both sides.