wussboy

Not Just Bikes makes a compelling argument that self driving cars are not the answer, and will almost certainly make things worse

Politics is a complex topic. If you want to learn more, social media is not the way to do it. Well reasoned books and essays are. If you want to convince others of your positions, social media is not the way to do it. Personal relationships in real life are.

What's left?

And the social media companies, who have essentially unlimited resources, would fight it tooth and nail

Sure you can. You can not post political things on social networks. They're not doing any good anyway. They're not changing anyone's mind. They're not providing depth or width to the discussion. I don't say this to be insulting, but rather a realist.

Most code will not kill people, but a lot of code could kill a business.

This is the fundamental problem. You know what you know, but the maintainer does not, and cannot possibly take the time to find out what every single PR authors knows before they accept it. AI breaks every part of the Web of trust that is foundational to knowing anything.

I find my trust in anything I see on the Internet quickly eroding. I suspect/hope that in the near future, no one will be able to be blacklisted or cancelled, because trust in the Internet has gone to zero.

I've been trying to hire a web dev for the last few months, and repeatedly encounter candidates just reading responses from Chat GPT. I am beginning to trust online interviews 0% and am starting, more and more, to crawl my personal connections for candidates. I suspect I'm not the only one.

And desertification has destroyed many existing biomes. I think, in the grand scheme of things, more forest is better than more desert, so this is a net positive.

This often confuses me as well. If no one has a job, no one can buy any goods or services. Then who will these companies that replaced all jobs with AI sell to? The AIs?

The fact they didn't is telling.

There was an article on here a few months ago that I agreed with. "Just give me the prompt".

> AI adoption is a bottom-up decision at the level of the individual worker.

Ah, but that is the question, isn't it. Is it bottom up or top down?

But that identity was crafted by marketing. It could just as easily craft another identity if required.

"If you don't like it don't take it" ignores all of human history. A huge majority of substances can be fatal if ingested. Are you sure you want to live in a world where Elon can speed run figuring out what won't kill "most" people?

If this is actually true, then what will soon happen is you will be expected to manage more separate “Patch” instances until you are once again chained to your desk.

Maybe the next bottleneck will be the time needed to understand what features actually bring value?

It is “bear”, meaning to carry.

Most houses in Canada are heated with natural gas. I'm not negating your overall comment, but in general, cold nights don't strain the grid because of heating needs.

In fact, some of every dollar you spend _must_ go to people you would find reprehensible if only you knew them better. Bought a Slurpee at 7-11? There's almost certainly someone in that corporation who will share ever-so-slightly in the revenue your $0.98 of sugar water brought in.

Ignore is not only bliss, but necessary.

I understand those distinctions, and I can definitely see people caring about that, although how you would tell seems impossible.

That's why I choose to make the distinction by just not caring about any kind of music that uses any kind of AI.

Is "calling out the bigotry" useful? I feel like the Internet has been used for this purpose pretty consistently for the last 15 years. Is it effective? Is there less bigotry now than before?

I would argue it has not in fact been useful, that making it shameful hasn't reduced it, and that calling it out in death is not useful in reducing it. I think we do it because it's easier than doing something useful and it makes us feel good.

I hate bigotry as well. I encourage to do something IRL about it.

I would think a two-week break over the holiday season wouldn't be a death knell.

I agree. “Wisdom of the crowd” is the least useful aspect of democracy. “Broad support” and “bloodless regime change” are probably the most useful.

I disagree with this idea. The current model (generally free content that is supported by advertisers) is not the only model that can exist. Yes the Internet would be vastly different if there were no ad revenue. But the Internet existed without ads before, and certainly could do so again. Services like Meta/X couldn't exist in that market, but would that be so bad?

I strongly support this message

The only sales book I've ever read that presented a sales process I thought I could do and not throw up was "Let's Get Real or Let's Not Play". I strongly recommend it for someone doing exactly what you're doing.

Why? Just leave it be, and your life will be just as rich if not richer.

…

But will also completely poison the well, reducing over-all trust and usage.

It's almost like that idea where the first people to leave in generational star ships will arrive at their new home to find the people who left in the third or forth generation ships already there for some time, technology having advanced so much in that time.

By the time they get the cable to Singapore, it will just be cheaper to generate it in Singapore.

"Your call is important to us." But, not important enough to actually hire enough people to answer it.