HN user

phatfish

1,873 karma
Posts0
Comments1,079
View on HN
No posts found.

It's almost as if we are in a comment section where most peoples jobs exist due to "content" either being stolen (AI most recently) or crowd sourced under EULAs that effectively steal it.

Not that I think a back door to the shit Disney and other corporate content onwers pull is nessecarily a bad thing. But it is funny to see people here gaslight themselves into believing they have some moral right to just take what others have created.

Yup, demoractic governments existed before the internet and repressive dictators have risen with it.

The idea that being anonymous online will save a society from a dictator/repression is wishful thinking.

Only good faith engagement with an existing democractic system will ensure the success of democracy, but that is too hard for most poeple.

99.9% on anonymous engagement online is bad faith.

Everything about UK rail is custom (apart from the gauge). Apparently it's one of the (many) reasons HS2 is such a mess.

They were trying to run trains faster than typical continental high speed lines, which meant custom design work that needs loads of additional testing and certification. Rather than just use the Spanish or French high speed designs.

"people under 16", you mean children right?

"who also have the rights to freedom of expression and privacy", plenty of outlets for people to be expressive in the UK (more so than in the US for example, where the right wing will obviously attack any social media restrictions) that don't involve being fed junk divisive content from mainly US tech companies.

Privacy != anonymity.

Feel free to route your traffic via Wireguard. As long as it is not setup as a service for the mass evasion of age gates by children.

Someone in another post was claiming there was a "right" to anonymity on the internet. That was news to me.

The "rights" of my children to not be exploited by Zuckerberg and the rest of them are far more important as far as I'm concerned.

To counter the privacy nuts, no age gates and social media bans won't lead to a North Korean style government. If anything it is the antidote as children will have a chance to grow without being radicalised by the attention stealing algorithms. The Stasi in East Germany did rather well without internet age gates.

Outrage against what? That age restrictions haven't been enforced sooner?

I read an article where some children were asked about their social media use. A few made the point that they just felt crap after a scrolling session. I think everyone here knows what it's like to realise you just lost an hour to two of potential productive time to HN. And this is just a text site.

Social media is engineered to steal your attention and feed you junk, divisive information. Why on earth would we allow kids to become addicted to that?

They were forced to invest in new energy technology because of lack of oil/gas reserves.

The US was on course to invest more as well (I guess the reason Musk saw the opportunity in Tesla), but then fracking happened and the US became energy independent with fossil.

Add the energy industry lobbying to kill clean tech and two Trump terms.

I have to fight with my family members when they "Google" something, read the top AI slop result, and I ask which page it came from. They believe what is on the Google landing page, and actually I don't think that is a naive assumption. Google has pushed itself as the information oracle, now they are delivering slop as the first result. It's a bait and switch.

I'm a parent and will take the second option in a heartbeat.

But it's not because I'm cool with my government "[not] doing it for protecting children" or any other conspiracy theory nonsense.

It's because governments ALREADY have all this information if they want it. Most people freely log in to their favourite services, and corporations will hand over data when asked. There are vast amounts of hacked data available, which any government with a competent intelligence service has a copy of. Then there are all the existing laws and intelligence apparatus that can track people.

Age gates wont help the government find out what porn you watch, or who you message on WhatsApp, they already know if they really wanted. But they will create a social contract that letting your kids loose on social media and unfiltered internet is unacceptable. At the moment bad parents have all the power, drawing the line somewhere and enforcing it will give power back to parents that want to raise their children responsibly.

Raising a generation of kids not addicted to internet brainrot is the real way to make sure democratic governments don't overreach with the data they have.

We don't let kids turn up to school drunk because they went to the cornershop on the way to school. I guarantee that would be happening if alcohol sales were not age gated and enforced by the government.

In the same way kids should not be infecting their minds with social media slop, or porn, or plenty of other internet content.

The only way this is stopped is when a social norm is created which shames all but the most negligent parents into compliance.

At the moment the absent and bad parents have all the power. Their kids scroll all night for memes, injest YouTube brainrot and turn up at school disruptive. Kids with responsible parents either want to that as well, or can't escape it.

Surveillance from age gates is a red herring. That horse bolted long ago. You are surveilled already by tech bros when voluntarily logging in, or by making yourself stand out a mile by using a VPN and a uncommon browser setup. This data gets handed to your government on request.

Having an anonymous VPN won't stop the tech bros or an authoritarian government forming, or bring one down.

People taking part in their existing democracy and maintaining the foundation of that is the best course of action. Raising a generation of kids not addicted to internet brainrot is a key part of this.

I think it's important to put numbers in historical context when saying or implying that we're in some kind of crisis.

But that would spoil some good click bait for the media, and ad hominem attacks from political opponents.

Will there be increase in production if the 3 companies that make the RAM decide they can profit more by keeping production mostly the same and flogging it for 10x the price of a couple of years ago to a few AI companies happy to burn cash?

The only hope is China spoils the party.

The reason they have the largest sovereign wealth fund (aside from getting it right in the 80s, unlike the UK), is that there is quite a bit of regulation around where and how the money is invested.

It is run to maximise growth for example, so even though Norway is way ahead with electric car usage and infrastructure (presumably because they have a climate likely to be most affected by global warming/heating) their fund still invests in fossil fuels as they are a profit/growth opportunity.

Anyway, i don't think it's as easy as "simply stuff shit loads of cash into buying whatever they need". I believe there would be a serious political discussion needed for that to happen.

I suspect is very hard to get a consultant that doesn't hand over a repo of AI generated nonsense right now. For the reason above, they are (usually) under time pressure to deliver, and they can wash their hands of the results at the end of the contract.

I am at 2 for 2 at the moment in the "infrastructure as code" arena (I wasn't involved with choosing to use a consultant, just dealing with the output). Which is an area that AI was supposed to eat for lunch. And it seems like it should, DSLs with a narrower scope seem perfect for an LLM, but I'm not convinced.

I think the issue is, infrastructure DSLs like Terraform or Azure Bicep are distilling down an architecture that has complex interactions and often needs a lot of "inside baseball" knowledge from outside of the code to create a congruent result. Unless you feed a bible of markdown files to the LLM to guide it in the right direction the output goes off the rails fast. The time spend creating the bible might as well be spent creating the code.

Of course there are areas where an LLM will definitely help, like re-factoring, stamping out boiler-plate or even building on a solid base. But attempt to create even a semi-complex architecture from scratch using a few paragraphs of prompt and you are asking for trouble.

The trouble with the consultants I have interacted with is they don't write the bible first, as far as i can tell they just iterate on slop and you end up with multiple 800+ line PowerShell scripts in IaC pipelines and other craziness that is almost impossible to unpick after they have gone.

Honestly, rather a "unelected EU bureaucrat" (What does this even mean? Are we going to individually elect the entire civil service, or require elected officials to delegate nothing and personally review every decision?) than an American tech-bro governing my internet usage.

The only people that think global free trade is a good thing are the top .001% net worth individuals which use it to wield power.

Trading blocks (like the European single market) are specifically designed to protect their members from shit that global corporations or other nations attempt to get away with.

I'm not sure what "Trade within Europe has massive restrictions." means without context. Compared to some Randian capitalist utopia where there are no rules and no governments? Or compared to before the creation of the European single market?

I doubt it makes people sad (well not me at least) because the buy in to get Citadel to invest for you is what 10? 50 million?

You could hit up juleiie from above for his/her winning method I suppose, or you put a portion of your savings into an appropriate ETF and get on with your life.

The issue is, to regulate the service Meta (or whoever) provides, they have to age gate anyway. Unless the service is child friendly for all users. Which would mean; follow and friend limits, usage limits, blackout periods after 9pm, only seeing posts from friends, no algorithmic "time line". That sort of thing.

That regulation would be orders of magnitude more difficult to implement. Just look at the malicious compliance the cookie regulations created, that was a single modal.

Better to just ban it for under 16s. That might happen before my kids are old enough to be fully exploited.

It's not being reductive at all. I'm certain parent commentor doesn't have kids so they don't care. If someone was using the street outside their house to deal drugs and causing problems they would be happy for the police to "regulate" that activity.

It's just selfishness. "I want some privacy utopia on the internet (which can no longer exist, the internet isn't the place of the 90s and early 00s), so your kids can be exploited by social media and porn".

I will do everything in my power to keep the tech bros out of my children's life. Yes, that includes being a responsible parent. It also includes societal norms being established. Just as was done for alcohol, nicotine, movies, porn mags ect.

I guarantee you are not as dedicated as me trying to protect my kids, so there will be age gates, and that includes VPNs.

Everyone knows VPNs are only used for getting shit for free, so there is also a pretty powerful corporate interest to lock them down. In the case of the "corporate content provides" vs the "tech bros", the enemy of my enemy is my friend, I'll take a win however it comes.

Mozilla have picked a battle that will kill off Firefox, I am now not longer interested in recommending or using it. I'd bet their user base skews to older people, more likely to be parents.

They also hired the eldest grandson of the most famous British fascist (Oswald Mosley) to be head of the UK division.

No idea what the grandsons politics are like, and the guy has to work somewhere. But, you get the feeling mentioning his famous grandfather in the interview was ticking a lot of boxes for this gig.