sooheon

Same, the ASCII interface is an eternal classic to me, the updated graphics try harder and achieve less (just my opinion).

If they're so valuable, maybe you could spare a thought of thanks that the previous owners passed them onto posterity, whatever the condition. If you don't like the condition, feel free to continue your search. Getting heated over their use of their own property isn't very philosophical of you.

That's just vanilla regulation. Yes it tends to create market inefficiencies, by definition. Capture entails industry corrupting and directing regulatory bodies.

I think this is plain old regulation, not regulatory capture. For it to be the latter we'd need evidence than it was the incumbents who designed this oversight which they then asked the white house to rubber stamp.

This straw man doesn't merit falsification. Nobody claims wealth alone gives political power. Wealth applies leverage to all endeavors, but political ends still require strategy and operationalization. It's just a lot easier with a couple trillion dollars, vs. a single individual vote once every couple of years.

> you start or fund a think tank that writes policy proposals, or a media organization that advocates your views

Or you run "money primaries", financially filtering the menu of candidates before democratic voting. Or you pay/lobby for (non-democratic) judicial appointments, which is a strategy that's been openly pursued since 1971: https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/blog/powell-memo.pdf

Nobody is forcing anyone to place bets they can't back, isn't this a personal responsibility issue?

edit: to be clear, if companies are committing fraud in their marketing, that should be prosecuted or if regulations around misleading marketing are weak, that should be legislated of course.

A family member lost years of irreplaceable photos and paid apps due to account lock, and doing this across two countries they were legitimately residing in triggered it.

Also went from one click to two clicks

Wonder why he was only charged with contempt, rather than defrauding investors?

Your nervous system extends over your entire body, the brain doesn't live in a firewalled jar.

Yeah not disputing that, just saying it's definitionally wrong to say land "is not the means of production".

This is a sad take, and a misunderstanding of what art is. Tech and tools go "obsolete". Literature poses questions to humans, and the value of art remains to be experienced by future readers, whatever branch of the tech tree we happen to occupy. I don't begrudge Clarke or Vonnegut or Asimov their dated sci-fi premises, because prediction isn't the point.

The role of speculative fiction isn't to accurately predict what future tech will be, or become obsolete.

Land (or in modern terms, location value) has been seen as a means of production along with labor and capital since Adam Smith.

My bad, went down rabbit hole and got my writers/links confused.

The 2020 adaptation of ZeroZeroZero, mentioned in this article, is one of the best crime shows I've ever seen, with basically zero buzz. Pretty interesting reading the reason for the authenticity.

The weird cousin of "This time it's different": "That time was different"

Yes, but rent seeking isn't even capitalism in theory.

I'm not sure what definition of capitalism you're running with, but as early as Adam Smith, the importance of competition free from monopoly and rent seeking was central to the mainstream definition.

Using power to tilt the playing field is the logical outcome of all political systems, not just capitalism.

> capture the market, and become the sole dominant force in that market and use your position to then pull up the ladder behind you and cement your position

This is worth discussing in detail. Becoming dominant by providing a better thing, or investing more capital, is not tilting the playing field, it's winning the game. Getting government protected monopolies, special tax write-offs, subsidies, exclusive grants is. Uber and Facebook are not anticompetitive just because they are dominant, they are anticompetitive to the extent that they specifically use their dominance to influence politics.

> Survival of the fittest and efficient marketplace

Rent seeking is an Econ 101 example of market inefficiency.

> what's the other option, rent seeking is socialism?

Rent seeking is rent seeking. It is a form of corruption, via regulatory capture. It is a way in which any political system can fail, not limited to an ideology like "socialism" or "capitalism".

This is misuse of language. Rent seeking is anti-competitive by definition. The current system, as far as it encourages and rewards rent seeking, is anti-capitalist.

Just like human atoms have been repurposed to make other things.

Let's flip the hypothetical -- if someone googles for suicide info and scrolls past the hotline info and ends up killing themselves anyway, should google be on the hook?

Could be, but there is another app that does the same thing faster so there must be some optimizations available.

The configuration lies. Even with "Show hints" set to "Immediately", there is a long delay. Feels like half a second on M1 Pro.

Shortcat has a ~second delay before showing links, homerow (https://www.homerow.app) is faster.

I've read Blindsight multiple times, and weirdly couldn't finish Echopraxia. Maybe this time.

Overworked is relative. As soon as a way to reduce current workload is available, everyone feels "overworked"

There's the cue for my biennial reread of Peter Watts' Blindsight.