6,211 karma · joined November 14, 2016
I assume you don’t think that, so I’m curious, what would you propose positively?
It would be interesting to see this raised in the next shareholders meeting as a question of whether the board and exec team are actually competent and doing their work.
A man can dream anyway. When there is this much money on the line, sometimes people actually get held somewhat accountable.
Try this: If you want to train a model, you’re free to write your own books and websites to feed into it. You’re not free to let others do that work for you because they don’t want you to, because it cost them a lot of time and money and secret sauce presumably filtering it for quality and other stuff.
But it seems clear to me that this is why I can't start typing right away when I first load the page and click to focus in the text field.
That might be the reason, but the number of people that actually use a mouse these days is tiny.
My wife and I live near a park. When we go on walks, we see people who have driven to the park, where they drive slowly around the parking lot, frequently stopping and starting, cars running the whole time. Rarely do they get out of their car. They are, I believe, playing Pokemon Go. Yesterday there were over 2 dozen cars driving around. Nobody was walking. They don't talk to anybody. They are like zombies. I don't get it. Yesterday I did see one dad with his kid, and they were out actually walking on the trails. I can understand that. But driving to the park to drive around?! Argh!
end rant. Thanks for listening.
"$1.3 billion came from the buyers’ own pockets”
"PE consortium collected $470 million in fees and interest over the course of ownership”
So they lost $830M on the deal?
But then literally every trade between two people—trading four sheep for one cow, say—is exploitation in both directions. I expect to benefit more from the product I receive than I can profit from what I give away. I have plenty of milk but need some wool for clothes. But to improve my own situation is somehow to abuse the other person!?
You’ve seemingly declared every form of economic transaction immoral.
If employment is violence, we should end it. But then almost everybody would die.
If paying for labor is violence, paying for a product is violence. Nobody should be allowed to buy or sell (or trade). But then everybody would die.
In a good economic transaction, whether purchase of product or labor, both parties end up happy with what they got out of the transaction. What is your time not working worth to you? If that value is higher than the money you get paid for your time and labor, then quit. Nobody is forcing you to work. But then, if you don’t have anything to eat, the value of your empty time might decrease in your own judgment. You might think, actually, I’ve got an excess of time and energy, and I’ve got a need for money and food.
I think it’s a pretty sweet deal to be able to work and get paid. Not violence.
And you say it's stronger now.
Ok, so which country or neighbor is going to be the one to hack our national encryption system with a back door the first time? The second time? The third time? Before we manage to get it right (which we never will), what damage will be done by the backdoor? Probably something like Salt Typhoon, which you also conveniently ignore as a counterfactual to your claim.
This should be trumpeted as an example of why we cannot mandate encryption backdoors in chat, unless we want everybody to have access to every encrypted message we send.