simplify

Definitely rude, too close to the same name. Warp just recently open sourced their client, a [not community] personal fork should be more considerate.

Does it not sound insane to you that you need to expose your biometrics to a corporation just to make anonymous posts on a forum?

Cool concept! I play Go, and it's extremely unnerving that all the good shapes you play in Go are essentially the worst shapes you can play in Tiao :D

Sure, but that seems out of scope of the original comment.

What is the purpose of this mindset? Should we encourage typical corporate coldness instead?

Same here, maybe we're grandfathered into a good plan or something.

Since when has raising taxes actually solved any major problem? We have enough taxes, the issue is the corrupt politicians swindling it to themselves and their cronies.

Power is not the problem, because power exists regardless of who owns it.

We the people actually have a relatively high amount of power in our states and communities. We just don't use it. The real solution is to convince the masses to pay attention, which is harder today than it ever was.

LLMs are an amplifier. The great get greater, and the lazier get lazier.

Youtube's downvote button has served me quite well for this purpose.

Yeah, Mithril got this right over 10 years ago. Still good to see at least one big player finally catching up. React's state model has always been a pain to work with.

Same here. I tried codex a few days ago for a very simple task (remove any references of X within this long text string) and it fumbled it pretty hard. Very strange.

I misread your "It always backfires" comment as making something illegal always backfires, rather than the desire to make things simple always backfires (note that "always" implies 100%). So now I see all you're saying is "be careful", which is fine.

Of course you prefer reductionist, because that fits your interest of doing nothing, rather than seeking a solution to the very real destructive consequences of the genre in question. That's what I mean by intellectually lazy.

Porn is way easier to define than obscenity, so I don't see that being a problem.

You're framing of "sex icky" is a common reductionist approach to remove all humanity from the topic and try and make it purely logical. But that's always been a ridiculous way to argue.

The human experience has never been pure reason. A picture of a naked person will have wildly different effects than a picture of a dog, even though you could technically say they're both "just pixels on a screen". Reductionism doesn't get an argument anywhere; it's too commonly an intellectually lazy defense of the vulgar.

Not being 100% effective isn't backfiring. No law is ever absolutely effective. But making something illegal objectively makes it more difficult to obtain, and is certainly effective at reducing access, even if it's not 100%.

> if one were to operate at that level then Facebook would be illegal.

Sounds great, where do I sign?

Sure ban porn, but IMO ban social media first. Or at the very least, mandate educational materials on it. Kids grow up thinking it's important and it ruins their lives. Brainrot content deadens their sensory inputs. Same thing needs to happen with AI; we seriously need some required education in these spaces.

Anything can be used for evil, doesn't mean that thing instantly becomes evil.

Even though the conscious brain doesn't always directly control motor skills, I wouldn't call it "merely an observer". It's your consciousness that decides your goals and beliefs; the rest of the body "learns" those things and is then preconditioned to react accordingly.

But they are separate systems. Harsh experiences (traumas) can teach your body some bad lessons in such a way that not even your conscious mind can overcome. In these situations, you can't "think your way out" of these traumatic consequences in, say, a talk therapy session; you need to deal with the body directly/somatically to recover instead.

What are the most common issue/mistakes that make communities fizzle out?

Even figuratively, it's not criminal.

Yes. Humans in general are very bad at dealing with delayed consequences.

Let's be real, people have said similar things about AI too. It was all fluff, until it wasn't.

Terrible idea how so? You just said it's a personal project. What's the harm in learning and doing what you want? :)

> If they did, what's stopping everyone else from doing it? I am expressing doubt.

This is a pretty interesting topic on human nature. Chain of reasoning doesn't always result in proper action. For example, my cousin has been having a lot of health problems lately. Logically he knows that alcohol is contributing to them. Yet, when he's out with his friends, he can't help but drink anyway, despite knowing (and likely ignoring for the moment) the consequences of doing so.

Similarly, things like junk food and overpriced status-symbol vehicles have objective costs that prey on the weaknesses of human nature. Whether to restrict such things, and by how much, is where the subjective aspect comes in.

This also all presumes we share the same values of "let's try to reduce human suffering somewhat". A libertarian, for example, would just say "live and let live".

Sorry to press, but I'm not sure if you answered my question. Why mention that you think most people do not believe it? In your latest comment, you didn't justify, but you did "outright say" it again. What value does bringing it up have?

Not trying to be combative, just thought it's an interesting point in this discussion of objectivity vs subjectivity.

To take it even further, why does being in the minority matter at all? Curious what your motivation is for mentioning that aspect.

I believe it is more superficial than it sounds: https://www.expressionsofchange.org/dont-say-homoiconic/

Really cool to see a language make concurrency and parallelism its primary goal, rather than an afterthought.

(yes I know erlang/elixir exists, but Crystal seems bent on being CPU-fast too!)

"Boiling down" is taking something to its fundamental level. Breaking it down to the axioms, essentially.

And yes, when it comes to value systems, those axioms are cryptically religious.