brezelgoring
Targeting victims of previous scams is common in crypto and MLM circles. The trick is almost always promising them an out of their previous losses with a new venture and this venture is sold to them on the basis of them being ‘experienced’ or ‘knowledgeable’ about the previous venture.
I’m extrapolating but this would hardly be “misrepresenting” his position.
It's naive grandstanding in the best of cases, and malicious proselytizing in the worst.
Mark Andressen will be in the picture somehow, I just feel it.
Facebook isn’t a pets/cars/vexillology site, it’s an all-site; it and its kin are designed to contain almost all of humanity’s interests. It stands to reason that all manner of ads would fit in there, and in order to make these ads useful you need to filter or target them. If you see the history of targeted advertising, a case could be made that Facebook invented it as we know it today. No diss meant to Google and Googlers that might read this, I’m sure they played a big role as well.
I'd have a nephew or younger sibling with some take on his hands to make measurements around it and make a graph with the sound levels at various radii and times of day, that'd build you a strong case for the factory being hazardous to health - and hopefully give you ammo for the upcoming legal trouble there'll be over there.
Some of them live in such an environment already. I don't know if it's a hallucination or not, but judging from what I've read here over the years a lot of tech people seem to live in the most cutthroat of environments and see everyone as competition to be eliminated or obstacles to be cleared. Some of them live in an environment where you can rely only on yourself, requesting help is seen as weak victim-like behavior, but giving out for free is worse - detrimental because that other person might see what you're doing and take credit for or steal your work; some say helping another with your skills/time and not charging money is peak cuck behavior, and some of the more organized (I'd like to say 'coeficient-driven') members of our community really believe that money is the greatest measurement tool ever invented and we should measure everything with it, including a person's worth.
That being said, generalizing is bad and there really are some truly golden individuals here who have done humanity a net benefit while charging nothing for their work. Like Fabien Sanglard, for example (you likely will never read this but I take my hat off to you and I hope if you get the chance, you should clone yourself in the future - humanity could use at least 10 of you).
I'd find quotes for all of these but I don't think I need them, you've seen these messages if you read the HN comments enough.
Edit: In the 10 or so minutes I took to write my comment, yours went from all black to almost unreadable. It shows better than any treatise would on the opinion HN denizens have on 'free' or 'equal' anything.
I should know, I'm from there as well and he is one of our few cultural exports aside from Football.
It took a conscious effort not to do this kind of morbid activities. I found late into my Rimworld experience that healing and releasing prisoners nets you good relations with other factions. After releasing 5 or so of them with a full belly and no injuries the tribes and cities around you decide “Hey, you’re alright, mister, we won’t raid you anymore”. Except for pirates, space pirates will never like you. So they either become chicken feed, an involuntary organ donor or a couch, maybe all three.
Time and effort and resources put into helping people that came specifically to kill you doesn’t happen spontaneously and I doubt a kid would favor that style of play. I wouldn’t want my son to tell me stories of how he turns people into a log or how his cyber super soldier can level 100s of tribesmen with a minigun by himself.
I’d rather introduce him to other war crime sims like Factorio where humans aren’t the subject of his ire.
If he finds out drug trade, organ harvesting and slave trading are the easiest/most efficient methods of making money, and he will, you might expose him to something a sub-12 year old may not be ready to process yet.
That being said, I love Rimworld and have 1200 hours put into it. It really is the ‘forever game’.
Not related, I know.
I will think twice now before saying “why couldn’t they just use USB for this?”
I was familiar with his YouTube work but not his writings. Thanks for introducing me to him.
No offense to you, I want to like what you're offering, but I can't excuse it. Do you have a PDF of the first chapter or the intro at least? I want to see a bit before I send you 20 bucks.
It's so nice.
Using AI, such as ChatGPT and Claude and such, in contributions to Free/Libre software, is not practically wrong, it's ideologically wrong. It is so, in my opinion, because the AI was produced by a company that did not ask anyone for permission when incorporating training materials (applies to all commercial AI products of today), it did not respect the liberties of its contributors nor its rights to ownership of their work (applies to all commercial AI products of today), and now asks of you to foot the bill for whatever slop it produces (applies to most commercial AI products of today, some are still free to use).
You can use your tools if you like them, that's fine, I'm not your boss. But on that last point, a large majority of users I've encountered, in this thread even, seem to agree that all AI-produced works need retouching (big or small retouching, though most often big) in order to be usable in any serious endeavor. Midjourney users need to touch up the fingers and the landscapes and look for artifacts of all kinds. Copilot users need to rewrite whole algorithms sometimes because of plagiarism and outright erroneous calculations (unless you don't care). ChatGPT needs to be fact-checked if you ask it to write anything significant.
I ask you this, if you have to oversee everything it produces, costs money, and is generally agreed to produce low-quality work, why not hire a junior employee instead? Freshers, as our fellows in India would call them. Lord knows we need more of them.
I only object to the use of AI in places where I have to put my signature and will be held liable for whatever output the AI decides to give me.
Like that Lawyer that made a whole deposition with AI and got laughed out of the room, he could’ve been held liable for court fees of the other party in any other country, and lawyers aren’t cheap! I don’t imagine his employers were very happy.
The ban touches on products made specifically for Gentoo, a distribution made entirely with Free/Libre software, made (mostly) by volunteers. Why would any of these volunteers, who chose to develop for the Gentoo distribution specifically - presumably because of their commitment to Free/Libre software and its community - go along with using AI tools that: A) Were trained on the work of thousands of developers without their consent and without regard for the outcomes of said training; and B) go against the wishes of the project maintainers and by extension the community, willingly choosing to go against the mission of the distribution and its tenets of Free/Libre software?
It sounds to me that people would do this either unknowingly, by not knowing this particular piece of news, or maliciously, making a choice to say “I will do what I will do and if you don’t like it I’ll take my things and go elsewhere”. I don’t accept that any adult, let alone a professional developer would grin in the darkness of their room and say to themselves “I bet you I can sneak AI code into the Gentoo project in less than a week”. What’s the gain? Who would they be trying to impress? Let’s not even open the big vault of problems of security that an AI coder would bring. What if your mundane calculator app gets an integral solving algorithm that is the same, down to the letter, as the one used in a Microsoft product? That’s grounds for a lawsuit, if MS cared to look for it.
The former case may prompt a reconsideration from the board - If key personnel drives the hard bargain, the potential loss of significant tribal knowledge may outweigh the purity of such a blanket ban on AI. The latter case surely will bring about some though, but of staying the ship and making the ban even more stringent.
On a personal note, I use no AI products, maybe I picked them up too early but I don’t like what they produce. If I need complex structures made, I am 100% more comfortable designing them myself, as I have enough problems trying to read my own code, let alone a synthetic brain’s. If I need long, repetitive code made, I’ve had a long time to practice with VIM/Python/Bash and can reproduce hundreds of lines with tiny differences in minutes. AI Evangelists may think they found the Ark but to me, all they found was a briefcase with money in it.
It's not a lot, but it's weird it happened twice.
Still works like a charm but the latch broke sometime in the 90s, so we have a pulpo to hold it closed.
It will outlive me, I’m sure of it.