lucketone

> We do it for food, oil, weapons, vaccines, you name it.

Much easier to have a reserve of X, if X can be put in a warehouse and transported later.

After reading comments here, I think that US has plenty of cheap housing… but… cheap housing is in places where people don’t want to live. (Demand is low, price is low)

If you actually plan to use your own money to build a reserve of housing, better double-tripple check if anybodyz will want to live there.

Wealth was quite consolidated when most population were peasants.

Eventually buying spacex is obvious and correct. Buying prematurely is questionable.

Not changing rules would seem quite obvious and correct at the same time.

I would refrain from calling it “dumb”. Just different. Maybe a bit of a hype thing.

But it good illustration of why valuation is so high

> expects

Is bearing a lot load here.

It is a press release with a goal to create hype.

I.e. it has no relation to “facts”

… unless they would also share underlying numbers (e.g. cost/profit per customer, and why they think some things will increase)

Yes, because in all likelihood an artificial train is coming

Building on that futurism.

We might design organic brain extensions, so people just become smarter, making LLMs obsolete. (Brain-Bluetooth interface for additional cost)

Track record would matter if we would need to trust him. (E.g. he knows some hidden insider data which stays secret, while he shares only a conclusion without must justification)

Track record is not relevant if it is a prediction with all the arguments laid out in the open.

Which is our situation closer to?

Still, one can buy lot of interesting problems with that money.

XZ attacker spent half a year earning trust, doing real maintenance.

Different order of magnitude effort spent during XZ attack.

Frontend has lower barrier of entry and more appeal for beginners, so its bell curve might have its left edge is thicker. It impacts the avg of problems and culture of dealing with them

If the goal is to be misleading, but technically correct, it hits the bullseye

Emotionally I’m all-in on painful punishments for bullies.

But when I stop, and think slower, and more rationally:

That bully is a human being who will grow up and he will be a neighbour to somebody (some will die, some will go to prisons, but most of them will be somebodies neibhours).

If we show him only more and more cruelty, he will be a terrible neighbour to somebody (so indirectly, the system made that somebodies life worse).

One anecdote of creative solutioning: to reduce vadalisations of waste bins in the village, teacher somehow convinced(maybe by promising bad grade if they don’t) several bully’ish kids to make baskets, to be used as waste bins.

Idea was that makers will feel some ownership for it, so they won’t damage it later and maybe even prevent lower ranking bullies as well.

I’m aware of that specific meaning. (Hiding under uncommon port, also falls under same umbrella)

But I think it is interesting and useful to detach from that specific label with all connotations, and treat it for a moment as just regular english phrase.

So we can analyse the wider pattern, see why it is deemed flawed, whether it is a binary choice or a spectrum.

(Notable thing to frame the analysis: hacker does not attack RSA, hacker will hack certain implementation of SSH server and use heartblead-v2 to sidestep RSA completely)

> you still regard flags as having some sacred meaning

I would like to disagree on this point.

Yes. Password and hashing algorithm are distinct things. I fully agree with you.

Stop and reflect for a moment. Then continue as usual (quite likely)

That evil city council..

Is it that important to decode what author thought when he was making it?

What if the design was made by generative model, does the statue become more or less valuable?

Somebody has to enlighten mimosa-party participants about socialism.

Nations != governments.

“Nations” as synonym for country started appearing only recently, in last two/three hundred years.

Flags have thousands of years of history.

All modes of cyber security depend on some obscurity (e.g. password)

Ideally we want a viable plan B, for when it’s leaked/figured out. (E.g. generate new passwords)

(For convenience let’s label air-gap as kind of physical security)

To have good test harness you need to get deep into business logic. Am I missing something?

Rugby?

Until RAM prices increases significantly.

This is still an ulterior motive (even if benign; we all do it to some extent).

Behavior will diverge eventually.

Because emotions are what drives our decisions.

If you really love tennis, then you spend time and money on tennis. If you just say it to be nice (or to impress somebody), you will not invest into activity that much and will search for opportunity to stop.

If one is unable to feel emotion X, then:

1. One has some ulterior motive for faking it.

2. One’s actions will likely diverge from emotion X. (Eventually)

If everybody believe the same lie, then it could be indistinguishable from the truth. (Until, the nature of the lie/truth become clear)