hexator

I'm worried that any ban on Chinese AI models might be an excuse to get mass surveillance.

I love this emerging "3D pixel art" trend. Stylized graphics always age better than realistic. And it definitely has more charm

The Catskills have those environmental protection laws because they are the water source for NYC. It would be very stupid to relax those to build data centers.

These people should be treated as insane, because they are.

not only is the premise wrong

The blog post offers several studies as evidence, where's yours?

2020

Yes but let's not pretend this isn't a new interpretation.

Moving to the Cloud proved to be a pretty nice moneymaker far faster and more concretely than AI has been for these companies. It's a fair comparison regarding corporate pushes but not anything more than that.

Some people really do hate AI, it's not entirely about the layoffs. This is a well insulated bubble but you can find tons of anti-AI forums online.

Couldn't you just say that language is just one of many avenues of thought, instead of being the only way?

I keep thinking I need to get into some new AI topic like MCP, but then my procrastination pays off when it becomes outdated not even six months later.

In hindsight, the previously scientific conception that Humans were somehow different than animals and that we don't have things like instincts comes across as incredibly foolish and not a little bit conceited.

It's good to have competition, but they're a fair bit behind SpaceX and it's hard to see them catching up without a lot of investment.

I'm a bit worried how invasive and toxic this could end up in ~10 years when OpenAI needs to push profit more.

Nevertheless, Google has a remarkable trust problem with the general public.

We're not talking about famine, we're talking about people living in poverty? What's your argument here? That because nobody dies of malnutrition we don't have true poverty?

I can definitely see a situation where a renting single-earner six-figure household in a place like SF may require assistance. It's all about the relative cost of living and financial situation, you can't really make ground pronouncements like this without ignoring the data.

Living paycheck to paycheck is not the same thing as being in poverty

You can debate the exact statistics all you want, but to anyone not well off right now, both in the US and the UK, it's pretty clear there's a growing cost of living crisis and governments are failing to address it. Frankly a lot of people here have no idea what living in poverty means.

That's a pretty radical claim. Do you have any sources?

edit: so many downvotes from asking a simple question

Well, you're right that this isn't journalism per se. But it's not trying to be, so your comment is a bit weird. Nobody is confusing the ACLU with CNN.

I'm not talking about cultural differences. I'm talking about people simply being assholes online. You will always have a group of people complaining about the rules, that is inevitable.

"virtues" is just a loaded word now unfortunately.

"enforce a set of virtues" is a weird way of saying "enforcing basic decency". Let's be clear here, people who are rightfully banned are always going to complain. Our opinions as the majority who DO want decent conversations online are not irrelevant. We should not give those people equal weight to those facing actual censorship. Fragmenting the internet will never get rid of the problem that moderation needs to happen.

Speaking of people who are very articulate and also very wrong.

This person doesn't seem aware of their contradictions in both complaining about people not following diverse viewpoints and also downright dismissing any amount of self-reflection that might be coming from people to their left.

That's true, the point I was making was that it's about you decide to trust with sending you news not just the outlet. The problem is that many people who are rightfully distrustful of traditional media end up following cranks. And Substack seems to be the place where the cranks hang out.

Not sure what the point of this is other than to complain about being out of touch with the world. Too many people think "diversifying your information" means subscribing to whatever drivel they find on substack instead of, you know, following a diverse set of _actual journalists_.

I find it to be a dangerous ideology since it can effectively be used to justify anything. I joined an EA group online (from a popular YouTube channel) and the first conversation I saw was a thread by someone advocating for eugenics. And it only got worse from there.

A paradox of effective altruism is that by seeking to overcome individual bias through rationalism, its solutions sometimes ignore the structural bias that shapes our world.

Yes, this just about sums it up. As a movement they seem to be attracting some listless contrarians that seem entirely too willing to dig up old demons of the past.

Telling poor people we're living in an era of abundance is not a little bit tone deaf. Also, having a car doesn't make one not poor— A car in America is not a luxury, it's a requirement to have a job in most places.