notabee

I am really starting to think that the Very Smart People (pejorative) holding power think that they can just copy the Chinese mass surveillance and social control model without changing anything else about the economic or cultural models of the U.S. and Europe, and that's going to somehow allow us to compete with them. I'm sure there will be massive exceptions for anyone wealthy and connected, so the panopticon is just a way to whip and threaten the common folk. That's also why it probably won't work. In a way it just reeks of desperation and reaching straight for the most authoritarian approach.

I think that fasting-mimicking diets are a way to potentially get some of these benefits through occasionally engaging these "slower speed" repair mechanisms without permanently living with bare minimum protein intake. But I also think that at this point so far we've seen fat, sugar, and then all carbohydrates villainized. I don't think that excessive protein is going to turn out to be a good idea either and it will likely also have its turn as villain, especially after all of these new high protein fad foods that are still highly processed junk run their course. People just need to balance their damn nutrients and eat whole foods. There aren't many real shortcuts to health, but we're just desperate to find them due to time poor societies obsessed with hyper-optimization.

For a deeper dive on just how that funding is meant to circumvent constitutional protections that normally exist around law enforcement, I recommend watching this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkgNnbTrsgw

Conway's Law still holds true. Software applications will resemble the communication structure of the companies that build them. If the companies are comprised of 90% overly verbose bullshit, so too will be the fragile slop monstrosities that they build.

Any system is going to have a free rider problem. I genuinely believe that if we stopped trying to force a large chunk of the population to look like they're busy when they have zero intrinsic desire to do anything well and will continually cut corners wherever they can, we'd reach a productivity golden age where there would be enough surplus for them to fuck off and be lazy out of the critical path. The stumbling block here is always the perception of unfairness, and it's a big one, but for anyone that really cares about their work or its quality, do you really want to always have to work with people who will only do the bare minimum to survive? Hopefully you aren't cold enough to want them to starve, but should they be forced to participate and drag everyone else down just to prove some kind of innate moral ethic? I wish that we as a society could approach this pragmatically instead of moralizing under a veneer of pragmatism.

I really hope that more people become aware of how much of our society is turning into kayfabe. Just think of the rise of all the new types of ____ theatre like this that have been coined over the last decade or more. It's not an accident or fad, it reflects something true that's happening to society at large. Everything authentic and valuable is being turned into something inauthentic, based only on conjured up perceived value and competition to fulfill the perception, and not real or useful purposes. It's all in the service of propping up systems that no longer function for the majority of people, or even for basic needs. And until a lot more people are willing to point out that the emperor is quite naked, even at their own social or financial risk, this will continue to rot everything down to the foundation.

The U.S. has done that kind of thing before, and that's probably why it's so paranoid about having the same kind of thing done to it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/national-...

The problem with this becoming the only reasonable tactic writ large is that it creates social bubbles just like social media. You wind up with very insular cultures and I think at least some of the hype addiction problems seen in tech can be attributed to these echo chambers. It's a hard problem to solve, especially now with LLMs being force amplifiers to low effort hiring and job seeking attempts. But to not solve this problem will, I think, continue to make increasingly unwell companies and unwell industries as the "meme pool" gets very shallow.

It's baked into the foundations of the U.S. While perhaps not a cult as we describe it today, even the first puritans that settled here were considered extremists not welcome in their home countries. For such a young country, we have always had a burgeoning industry in upstart cults, grifts, and religions (but I repeat myself).

I had a situation like that with an undocumented behavior and systemd-tmpfiles. I wanted it to clean up a directory in /var/tmp/ occasionally. The automation using that directory kept breaking, however, because instead of either finding a whole intact git repo to update or a deleted repo, it instead found only a scattering of files that were root-owned with read-only permissions. There was yet another undocumented feature in systemd-tmpfiles where it would ignore root-owned, read-only files regardless of explicit configuration telling it to clean up the contents of those directories. Eventually this feature was quietly removed:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1780979

https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/a083b4875e8dec5ce5...

That was far from the only time that the systemd developers decided to just break norms or do weird things because they felt like it, and then poorly communicate that change. Change itself is fine, it's how we progress. But part of that arrogance that you mentioned was always framing people who didn't like capricious or poorly communicated changes as being against progress, and that's always been the most annoying part of the whole thing.

Billionaires are buying up and consolidating all of the media outlets just as a hobby, I'm sure.

I'm pretty much always disappointed these days reading online discussions, and I sometimes think about how intentionally devolving most online conversations into petty slapfights is one of the very effective astroturfing techniques. It's basically signal jamming anything substantive or cooperative because people get tired sifting through all the noise and get mad reading all the bad takes. Though I have no doubt that many of them are still 100% genuine foolish humans.

I really wish people would stop fixating on one nation-state or other entity when it comes to the astroturfing problem. It's something that's going to have all sorts of hands stirring the pot since it's basically just a very pernicious new form of marketing and propaganda. Any sizeable countries or corporations are going to be utilizing this new tool of manipulation, regardless of how scummy that may be.

The longstanding existence of religions and the continual birth of new cults, the popularity of extremist political groups of all types, and the ubiquity of fortune-telling across cultures, seem to stand in opposition to your assertion that people hate being manipulated. At least, people enjoy belonging to something far more than they hate being manipulated. Most successful versions of fortune-telling, religious conversion, and cult recruitment do utilize confirmation bias affirmation, love-bombing, and other techniques to increase people's agreeableness before getting to the manipulation part, but they still successfully do that. It's also like saying that advertising is pointless because it's manipulating people into buying things, and while people dislike ads it's also still a very successful part of getting people to buy products or else corporations wouldn't still spend vast amounts of money on marketing.

It's also a social coordination problem. For example a neighborhood where all the homes have to be fire resistant is going to fare a lot better, and probably be cheaper for the individual home owners to build and insure, than the one fire-resistant home in a neighborhood of tinder boxes. I don't think the prognosis is good for the U.S. in that regard. We have very little social cohesion and a lot of parties interested in making the situation worse for their own benefit.

That's not really true. The introduction of so much extra energy into the atmosphere is going to make weather extremes worse all over the world, and harder to predict as historical models become less relevant. Large scale pattern changes like the AMOC shutting down are going to completely change many local weather patterns so that e.g. places that have little history of tornados will start having them, or places that used to be too wet for wildfires will suddenly experience them in extreme drought conditions. Despite scientists' best efforts, we're running a global experiment with no control group and predictions will only become more difficult the harder we push the system into a new state.

But then it's harder to shim in the money-makers like microtransactions, loot boxes, and all the other recent "innovations" in the gaming industry.

Or more likely, listening to background noise to spy on what family members are saying and listening for marketing/brand trigger words. It may not be very human audible but if it's machine audible it will probably be scraped.

Considering how massively in bed with the U.S. government and other governments that Microsoft is, and said government has been known for keeping tabs even on allies(1), I'm sure that certain parties have a keen interest in keeping up with what's going on at CERN that's not just scientific curiosity. Strangely these Microsoft evangelists manage to pop up in organizations all the time to reverse any open source initiatives. Could just be a coincidence though.

1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/national-...

The blame should honestly go to Congress, because they keep interfering in the process to force NASA to stick with SLS. NASA has tried several times to ditch this albatross around their necks only to be scolded by influential senators determined to keep money flowing into their states despite the overall project failing wildly.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/02/so-long-senator-shel...

People have been talking about raising the minimum wage to $15 for so long now (the "Fight for 15" movement started in 2012) that the inflation-adjusted value of that would now have to be almost $21/hr. However, the minimum wage is still $7.25 and seems to be likely to remain so.

This has been posted here a good bit before, but adding it in as relevant.

https://www.propublica.org/article/how-navy-spent-billions-l...

We've let everything go to rot for the sake of a giant financial ponzi scheme that we call the U.S. economy.

It's not harsh. The tide went out and it turns out a lot of people were swimming naked.

Without delving into any kind of specific conspiratorial thinking, I think people should also include the possibility that this was malicious. It's much more likely to be incompetence and hubris, but ever since I found out that this is basically an authorized rootkit, I've been concerned about what happens if another Solarwinds incident occurs with Crowdstrike or another such tool. And either way, we have the answer to that question now: it has extreme consequences. We really need to end this blind checkbox compliance culture and start doing real security.

Just perhaps the idea of sticking everyone's retirement funds into massive passive vehicles was a bad one and has an unhealthy effect on the market, as you illustrate here. It is the way of things now so I see your point and it would be harmful to people, but getting in this situation has seemingly removed what could be a natural lever of consequence. We can't really hold companies accountable lest all the "regular folks" that can't actively supervise what they're investing in become collateral damage.

Unless the way elections are handled changes, such as doing anything that selects for expertise instead of partisan hackery, all this is going to do is accelerate the gridlock, corruption, and dysfunction. It just does not logically follow that putting more pressure on the legislative branch to be functional is going to work when its functionality or lack thereof is based largely on a very gerrymandered population being blasted non-stop by a completely co-opted, corrupt media. When the corruption and control is so thoroughly embedded already, the difference between "unelected official" and "party-and-special-interest-approved elected official" becomes a silly fig leaf of a difference.

It's true, the flexibility can be both a boon and a curse. There should be a little more "best practices" info out there that's not too prescriptive. It doesn't help that a lot of pre-made roles on Ansible Galaxy vary widely in style and quality. Certainly no one wants to inherit Ansible code that's nothing but shell and command modules, but sometimes those are crucial gap fillers when an idempotent module isn't available for the task or is missing needed functionality. And even then, specialized (as opposed to general use) modules are only idempotent within themselves and you still sometimes need to check and pass the state of things between tasks and stick that in a registered variable combined with conditionals if the multiple tasks are dependent on each other or require a specific ordering.

I think a good generalized "best practice" is to keep those inter-task dependencies and conditionals to a minimum though. Small chunks or no chunks at all. It's always better to find a way to just run tasks independently with no knowledge of each other. The block module with "rescue" is useful for failing out a host gracefully if there's a bundle of finicky inter-dependent tasks that just have to run together though.

HN culture is progressive on some things but very libertarian on others. It's not very left wing because a large portion of the posters here are quite insulated from the plight of blue collar workers.

It's called class solidarity, which the wealthy are smart enough to have and everyone else gets grind culture and crab bucket mentality instead.

Perhaps you haven't worked enough in a habitually blaming organization. The problem is that blaming is both easy and often spurious. So in the end you still often run into the same problem: a bunch of people pointing fingers at each other and no one owning anything. If anyone takes a fall because of it that's often more a measure of their political power rather than their actual culpability. It also fails to address dysfunctional organizational processes that make individual errors more likely, because everyone is more concerned with finding a single scapegoat or small group of them.

Maybe we need a new way of expressing "blameless" that still expresses that personal responsibilty for quality work should be expected, but that punitive blame politics are simply a very ineffective way of encouraging that or finding the truth when problems inevitably occur.