giaour

You may recall that the DMCA was originally written to protect music and movies. It does in fact apply to creative works. If you have ever purchased an MP3, eBook, or streaming movie, you will also be aware that you purchased a license to the underlying IP. This is also true of physical media, but the license agreement you have to accept when obtaining a digital work makes this explicit.

I agree that you can't patent a book, but I would point out that you can patent an idea, which may only appear in a book or journal article.

I doubt these will have worse protection than software does, which has far better protections than copyright

Software is protected by copyright. Some software may also be protected by patents, but last time I checked, AI generated output of any kind was not patentable.

Many are openly working to create AGI with the aim of harnessing it to solve humanity's problems. Do you really think being able to command an entity with human-level intelligence would be morally equivalent to using a tractor?

You could tell from tone and polish how much effort someone had put into writing an answer. That was a pretty good signal for some topics on forum sites like Stack Overflow. There were always nuts and cranks who would happily spend an hour writing well-formed prose about nonsense or something obviously wrong, but the eloquent ones were few and far between. Now every crank is equally eloquent and can spit out 1,500 words of passable prose in seconds.

Also keep in mind if your site is better indexed by crawlers you can literally influence future LLMs

Ah, what a glorious fate to aspire to.

Most people I know who have maintained blogs do so to build their personal brand, normally because they make a living through writing or consulting. Gently influencing the pre-tuning weights of future models is just providing unpaid labor to hyperscalers.

Most state legislatures work under a similar model -- being a legislator is full time work for a couple months of the year, and the rest of the time, delegates/senators are expected to have other jobs. (This is "enforced" by legislator pay being something like ~$10K/year.)

It's not a perfect system. There are very few jobs that just let you take off a couple of months a year, so legislators tend to have specific careers. Constituent services are required year-round, so legislative staff are full-time, year-round employees. And legislating has to happen quickly, so it's harder for citizens to interact and follow along with the process when they want to advocate for a bill.

I'm sure there is a way to use a step debugger with a specific unit test in Neovim or whatever, but it's one of the things heavyweight IDEs do with no setup or configuration.

It's been a few years since I worked in this space, but HIPAA doesn't really work under the same kind of legal framework. Oversimplifying here, but basically HIPAA defines what constitutes personal health information, how such information may be used, and establishes monetary penalties for improper use and unauthorized disclosure. The law doesn't have any certification standard, no more than the prohibition on stealing cars does.

Maybe there's some kind of third party certification system to support signing information sharing agreements ("BAAs") with other health information systems. I worked at CMS on first-party stuff so I'm not really familiar with how it works in the private sector.

- can run individual tests seamlessly

This is the main one for me. If I am working on a large project with decent unit test coverage, the feedback loop in IntelliJ or Visual Studio is just much quicker than the alternatives because you can run and debug the specific tests you need.

By statute, an organization can only exist as a non-profit in the US if it is "organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes"[0], and non-profit hospitals specifically must operate for charitable purposes.

It may not be wise to assume non-profits exist within the confines of the law that authorizes their continued existence, but I don't see how it's fallacious.

[0] https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-organiz...

I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hotdog today (if you want to get a circular investment bubble going)

So what was valued? Physical robustness. Strength, perhaps brutality. Competence in physical tasks. Honesty. Parentage. Birth order (see primogeniture.) Those matter in per-technological societies, and they matter in failed societies now. Those are perhaps humanity's core values.

This is a "noble savage" conception of the past. Thinking/cleverness/craftiness was highly rewarded even in preliterate societies. Even in war, "polytropos" Odysseus comes out ahead of the dumb brutes with bigger spears.

Data & Society put out a paper on this role back in 2019 but used the term "moral crumple zones" since they were focusing on how to assign blame in autonomous vehicle crashes: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351054898_Moral_Cru...

"Meat shields" has a nice physicality to it, though

Yep, that's why substitute teachers' interests are more zealously guarded by Congress than the interests of billionaires are. Teachers have wielded the enormous power they hold to get a <= $250 deduction for school supplies they purchase with their own money.

consider how much lobbying money is coming from CEOs and companies who know the domain best and are agitating for better financial and social safeguards for all.

To hear Marc Andreessen tell it, the US tech industry's rightward turn in the 2024 campaign was specifically intended to head off any attempt to regulate AI [0]. So the blame rebounds to tech CEOs even if you believe that only the government should take a holistic view of a given technology's impact.

[0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-06-11/marc-andr...

There are more recent versions with better names, like the Restore Trust in Congress Act[0], and one introduced a few days ago to ban congresspeople and the president (as well as their immediate family members) from betting on prediction markets[1].

I can only imagine the GP mentioned the PELOSI act (which, as I recall, was cosponsored by Nancy Pelosi and blocked by Republicans) because it was designed to be partisan messaging.

[0] https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/5106...

[1] https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2026/03/25/congress/la...

The $580MM transaction described in the article is already 1,000 times larger than the alleged congressional insider trading by Paul Pelosi that caused Sen. Hawley to introduce the PELOSI act.

You're right, but I think everyone is looking at second-order effects where causal links are impossible to prove. [0] is recent research on how expanding housing stock (even just at the top end) will "expand affordability," although they, too, are mostly looking at the effect on rents.

The most overt statement of "we don't want to build more houses because it will decrease the value of existing houses" in recent memory was Trump[1], who is not exactly a reliable source (and whose whole brand prior to politics was destroying the character of established neighborhoods by building giant condo complexes).

[0] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5780364 [1]: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/general/trump-says-the-quiet...

Do you believe that small drop is a result of new development or just a blip in the market?

I don't know, and I don't believe it's possible to know in a specific instance. Like I said above, I believe that in the long term, denser towns raise the property values of their suburbs by making the area more desirable.

But there is definitely a plausible case that increasing the supply of housing immediately lowers or slows the growth of property values by reducing scarcity. It's the argument made by both sides of the "missing middle" debate in Arlington -- the pro side says it will make housing more affordable, and the con side says it will lower everyone's property values. The article we're commenting on found that at least some version of this is true for the Austin, TX -- increasing housing stock lowered rents, even if the new stock is luxury units.

The article we are commenting on is literally about this happening in Austin.

Yeah, I live in Falls Church, which has seen more build-up than other areas in Northern Virginia because the city has never had the kind of restrictive zoning that the anti-"Missing Middle" campaign is still fighting in Arlington. The value of my single-family home peaked in 2024 and has dropped slightly since. To my understanding, this is generally true of my zip code and not true of comparable zip codes in the area.

But Falls Church is much nicer now that a few mid-rise apartment buildings with ground-level retail have gone in! As a resident, I am very happy about all the new development. I expect that over time, that will have a positive effect on property values, but there is an observable short- and medium-term effect working in the opposite direction as the increased housing supply eases demand on the existing housing stock.

I've never understood this: If I replace a single home with 20 apartment homes, I've raised the value of the whole property at purchase time no?

It's a commons problem. In your scenario, you have absolutely increased the value of your property. 20 apartments is more valuable than a single family home. However, you have also reduced aggregate demand by housing 20 people. That reduced the value of your neighbors' properties (or at least reduced the rate at which their value increased).

NIMBYism posits that values will continue to increase without forcing any property owners to invest in improvements so long as they collectively block any efforts to increase supply.

Are you saying there is no difference between the aggressiveness shown by the Department of War since it was renamed vs the years prior to the renaming?

Because it sure looked to me like they renamed the department and immediately started bombing fishing boats, then affirmatively decided to start a war with Iran, all while the guy who came up with the new name goes on TV and screams about how we're free to kill more people now.

Yes, but there is protocol-level support for "commenting" on a friend's post via a post of your own.

In the FAQ at the bottom of the post, the author mentions that this proposal is just the AT protocol (BlueSky) without the active, "firehose" component.

I don't think this is a real proposal, but more a thought experiment about how a static site could integrate into BlueSky. I saw a few similar efforts to integrate the "passive" components of ActivityPub into static site generators so that you could make your static blog consumable via the Fediverse.

In reality, if you really wanted to publish your static site blog posts on BlueSky, this is probably a good place to start! As you mention, there are some serious usability issues with doing everything by hand, but you may find that acceptable or invest in workarounds. Maybe it's possible to use your BlueSky identity so that you aren't in the business of managing keys. Or maybe you could use a script or static site generator plugin to pull credentials from somewhere.

Perhaps CZ's prosecution was generally regarded as political among the people you talk to regularly, but the contemporaneous media consensus (at least to my recollection) was that Binance had openly flouted US law for years and was finally being reined in. E.g., https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/22/business/binance-crypto-c... was representative.

What is a border when crossing it without permission is not illegal?

There aren't good statistics on how many undocumented immigrants overstayed a visa (and therefore legally crossed the border) vs how many entered without a visa, but experts estimate that it's somewhere around 40-45% [0]. It's not a criminal act to overstay a visa, though you do become subject to deportation. So a good chunk of "illegal immigrants" are doing something less illegal than, say, driving a car whose registration has expired (which is a criminal act), but, as another commenter noted above, we don't refer to "illegal drivers" on our roads.

The traditional term for someone who has not fulfilled a positive legal obligation like renewing their car registration is a "scofflaw," and I would not object to anyone referring to "scofflaw immigrants" the way I object to the phrase "illegal immigrants."

[0] https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/aug/24/kevin-mcca...

Beyond the reasonable suspicion of a threat to their life, the officer must believe that: a) the threat is imminent, and b) the threat will reasonably be mitigated by the application of force. An officer cannot, for example, immediately shoot someone who plausibly promises to murder them in 36 hours.

Just because some people who say "no one is illegal" also say "no more borders," that does not automatically mean that the former implies the latter. If that were the case, we could paint everyone who agrees with Nick Fuentes on any point (including, in the extreme, "nice weather we're having today") as a antisemite. The old joke linking dietary choices to Nazism ("You know who else was a vegetarian? Hitler!") is meant to make light of this logical fallacy.

The grandparent post accurately captured what I have understood people to mean by "no one is illegal" -- it is meant to protest a dehumanizing way to describe a class of people.

Yeah, it is theoretically possible to have a marketplace where "predatory pricing" is an accepted though aggressive business strategy, and I'd say that we are roughly there in the US. But the original intent behind the law on the books was to make markets friendly to new entrants, even if that meant sometimes constraining what large participants were allowed to do.