Terr_
Of course, "academically known" isn't quite the same as "executives willing to admit it in the face of IPOs and quarterly-earnings reports."
A stretch of unemployment can be weathered with good investments, and depressed investments can be weathered by staying employed, but both together forces people to "sell low".
Interestingly, the first few books are about Miles' parents, but it's neat to see what the most popular character does/doesn't inherit.
Quick gripe-anecdote that occurred (again) just now: I have a technical question, the search-engine says it was discussed in a Reddit thread, so I go to Reddit, giving them my traffic and eyeballs just like they want... but the information is impossible to find because "new" Reddit hides/collapses 90% of the discussion by default and there's no way to tell which branch has what I need without manually clicking them all. (And them some of them will reload the entire page, erasing progress.)
So I have no sympathy for their whining about scraping when they spent already years making it painful for actual live organic humans to find anything.
> Which is what social media is/should/was about
I think our two imperfect approaches here are:
1. Webs of trust, in some way that resists crowds of sockpuppets.
2. Some kind or proof of stake. Proof of anonymous-humanity is hard, proof of unique-humanity is creepy spy stuff, but "proof if you ban me it'll at least hurt a little" might be easier to achieve.
> "Well, I wish you every joy," Miles went on [...] He managed a wink. "Name the first one after me, eh?"
> [She] grinned. "I'm not sure she'd appreciate that. Milesanna? Milesia?"
> "Milesia sounds like a disease," Miles admitted, taken aback. "In that case, don't. I wouldn't want her to grow up hating me in absentia."
-- Memory (1996) by Lois McMaster Bujold
In the series, Miles having a name meaning "soldier" is, er, persistently thematically significant.
True, though that phrase understates the author's problem a bit, as it is surrounded with more wrong-words, indicating it's a wrong-idea rather than a slip of the tongue.
As you note, it's closer to office/travel expenses. Employee computers, licenses for software on those computers, licenses for SaaS stuff, paying for bandwidth, etc.
That's what surveillance-capitalism wants, but what regular people need is something which is easier to supply and less likely to be turned against them: A lesser proof of "I invested enough time/effort/money into this identity that I'll be hurt if its reputation craters".
_______________
From: JReyes//UNATCO.00973.20892
To: JCDenton//UNATCO.82098.9868
Subject: greetings and nanotech briefings
Hey JC,
Guess I'll have to get used to calling you "J.C." around the office. Not sure
where they came up with that, but at least they gave you the same last codename
as your brother. Anyways, whatever they've calling you, it's good to see a
familiar name on the roster.
My first job here has been to read up on your augmentations. I'm beginning to
see why you found classes so easy. EVERY NEURON IN YOUR HEAD has been augmented.
For example: the voice in your head (from an operator, someone here at HQ able
to handle the scanning equipment in your skull and broadcast advice over your
"infolink") leaps fully formed right into your temporal lobe, bypassing the
eardrum and its sensory neurons. And it's perfectly inaudible to everyone around
you, of course. Not to mention that the nanites clinging to your axons can both
receive and transmit symbolic information, so if you ever need help, don't sweat
it; someone at HQ probably already knows.
Come by if you want to hear more... this is great stuff...
JaimeThe problem I'm already having with LLMs (in miniature) is code/comments/docs where I don't know whether it's someone's intent or whether its un-reviewed LLM babble. That creates a continual stumbling block for figuring out whether the thing should be the way it is, or whether I'm looking at an unusually-coherent error.
Take the exact same messy pile of bytes but promise: "Everything in this made sense to a human at some point in the process", and that changes how one approaches the problem.
A bunch of it has to do with humidity levels that impair our natural ability to sweat. If the wet-bulb temperature [0] is high enough, a place may be unlivable without artificial cooling.
That's the charitable version, because otherwise they're happy becoming slave-owners.
[0] I hope it's redundant and unnecessary, but I've been mistaken before.
LLMs driving decisions are going to be like asbestos: People will ignore the risk for a while to make a short-ter profit, eventually it will become too hard to ignore, and then it'll be expensive to remove and replace it with a technology that doesn't have the same dangers.
[0] 3 years ago, "Universal Jailbreak Backdoors from Poisoned Human Feedback" - https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.14455
[1] 2 years ago, "Persistent Pre-Training Poisoning of LLMs" - https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.13722v1
You can still move it (bottom, top, left, right) it's just deeper in the options rather than being something you can switch on the fly.
1. I sneak into a movie theater without paying. Unauthorized access to the movie.
2. I write a review of the movie in the newspaper. Protected by fair-use, even if I sneaked into the theater.
I think it's a little more complicated than that, there was a submission about it earlier [0], where the author argued:
> EACv2 can't accept self-signed kernels and bootloaders, that would defeat the purpose. This means that, in order to play Fortnite on Linux, you will be forced to use a distribution that Epic approves of, with a bootloader that Epic approves of. This almost guarantees that anyone not running RedHat software is shit out of luck. But it gets worse. [...] Microsoft gets to decide what Linux distributions will run Fortnite. [...]
> Microsoft, the company that, has throughout its entire history, thrived on first controlling the competition to destroy them. They even coined a term for it: "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish". [...] You might as well install Windows at that point.
[0] news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50298563
I don't think the "breeding rate" was the limiting factor.
It reminds me of a bit from the book Lying For Money [0], where the author notes that you can often find multiple layers of scams attached to other scams, just like meta-parasite in biology.
[0] https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Lying-for-Money/Dan-D...
For example, Minecraft in Minecraft [0] is (while impressive) slow and inefficient too, but it doesn't tell us much about humans except that some of them are weirdly ambitious in their projects.