toofy

i definitely have internal debates on the idea of eminent domain and the nuances of wether i think its ok or not.

that said, i think i lean to it’s absolutely not ok to use eminent domain when the receivers of the benefits of the taken property are primarily one private industry and its owners.

i’d probably more often be ok with it if the benefits were mostly limited to being widely distributed to the people of that locality/region.

even then i go back and forth but i know for sure that plays a major part in how i see it.

… are we going to accept this same rhetoric for anyone that films others in public and/or commercial spaces?

yes, please.

i think that is exactly the direction we should be pushing. this creepy compulsion to record random people is weird af.

yeah i’m not sure where people are coming from when they imply the best way to fight off an extremely addictive thing is to use it.

we warn kids about the impacts of heroin, we don’t shoot them up with it.

practically speaking, a phone is a necessity.

no. it isn’t.

my apologies for sounding more blunt than im meaning to, but, im not at all sure where i would fall on the idea of banning kids from having social media powered phones, but i know they’re not a “necessity”.

indeed.

cause the problem then complain the problem exists. that’s been their intentional platform for years and years.

a24 was great, they’ve definitely slipped though. as soon as they won their first oscar they’ve been chasing money rather than quality.

their old catalog though, incredible. i’d say like 80+ percent of the movies they released were fucking amazing. but that has fallen dramatically.

neon is still going strong though!

it’s been this way forever. the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 00, etc… all had generic trash movies and music too.

stop getting recs from algorithms and the entire world will open back up to you. just like top40 music and generic movies from back in the day, you’re getting the lowest common denominator recs.

i read a book about the music industry in the 80s (it’s been a couple years and i can’t remember the name now) but people called the top40 music from back then formulaic. they were convinced record labels had formulas to make their pop music stars. what do you think algorithms are? they’re feeding you trash.

again, stop getting your recommendations from algorithms and the world will open back up. get your recs from actual film or music geeks. go to your local record store, look at their wall of employee recs, or *gasp* talk to them and ask them.

and a toyota camry can’t compete with a lamborghini but the camry vastly outsells them.

you’re far far far more likely to see a camry or equivalent in an americans driveway than you are a super car.

you’re also more likely to see an enthusiast with a corvette or equivalent muscle car spending way more than it’s worth to tinker on that car in their garage than you are a super car.

found on the always amazing bubbles.town

gareth sounds like my kind of guy lol.

it really is wild.

i’ve said it before and i’ll say it again.

the companies will have no one but themselves to blame when they’re regulated in and out.

if the companies don’t care at all about people and society to take actual material concrete steps to help, then we don’t need to care about them.

if they don’t care about me and mine, then i don’t care about them.

if a company cares about profits at any cost and has no regard for people, regulate them right out of business. i’m ok with that, they don’t care about me, have no obligation towards them.

... there is a reasonably strong argument that it was wrong to use copyrighted material for AI training without paying royalties nor even asking for permission. But equally, every country wants to have the most powerful models and enforcing such royalties would make it effectively impossible to train them as the amount of material required would cost an insane amount in royalty fees.

i think you're spot on this is one of the key arguments made beneath the surface. what i find so strikingly frustrating about it is, so many of the ai cultists [0] will imply and sometimes even outright say that writers, artists, musicians are silly useless and overvalued and the work artists do is entirely frivolous. then next breath explain why those artist's work is one of the most important things for a model to be trained on. suddenly art is very important. we absolutely must have access to their work. but also we shouldnt pay them because their work is silly and unimportant.

if an artists (musician, writer, journalist, painter, etc...) work is useless, then obviously you dont need it for training. if their work is imperative and you absolutely must use it, then pay for it.

ive noticed this with ai companies a lot. over and over again they contradict themselves to the core.

1) art is silly and not important enough to pay for but its absolutely foundational and we must be given unfettered access or our models will suck.

2) "our models are the smartest thing in the entire world. also, you're a dipshit if you trust them at all."

ill say it again, if removing art and culture from the training sets would render your model useless, then obviously pay for it.

[0] when i say cultists, im not talking about normal people who use ai. im talking about an entirely different group, we all know the types im talking about.

yeah, the answer lies exactly there.

the monetization is what killed blogs. great blogs still exist, but they’re almost entirely people writing about whatever their passion is, because they’re passionate. it’s as old as time, my dad uses the term “sellouts” when he’s contrasting terrible bands with good bands from his era. skateboarders call them kooks. same thing only with blogs, sellouts.

find the people who are writing blogs out of passion, not the idiot bloggers writing seo spam.

those days are still here, people just want to know where the information is coming from.

the rallying cry from hackers has never ever been “information wants to be free from sources”

and hackers have also never implied “information from a dipshit should hold the exact same weight as an expert”

yet somehow both of those is the world we’re running towards as fast as we can.

i believe that in the future technology will be so advanced that protection of privacy is impossible. the only way to counter that is…

i’m not sure why so many of us have fallen into this… “there is no other future” thing…

there are other options. plenty of them. there is no singular solution. we could always just say “no”. and that’s that. that would be one option.

why do we feel like there is no other way? why are we afraid to say “nah”?

yep. seeing it here as well.

i’d be curious to know more details as well. is this a targeted mass reporting or something?

let’s not forget the marketers who work for the same companies we do.

how many times have we all seen marketing departments or sales departments in our companies entirely misrepresent the abilities or purpose of a product we built?

it’s fucking unreal how many times i’ve seen on here where the engineers of a product were like “don’t blame us, our team was screaming trying to be heard that the marketing/sales departments are outright lying about the capabilities.”

at which point they’ve often twisted and bastardized the product opposite of the reasons we built it to begin with.

yeah, he seems to have the same issue a lot of these guys have. i’m convinced we’re going to find out at some point they’re all on some kind of modern meth type drug that entirely breaks their reality. the similarities between so many of their shifts are too striking.

well it could be limited to companies who are entirely dedicated to surveillance and massive data collection on citizens like palantir. particularly with that and how ideology based palantir appears to be.

i’m sure they wouldn’t be nearly as concerned about a US company that manufactured screwdrivers or nike or something similar.

if you take the time to read karp’s manifesto and look into thiels beliefs, then maybe it wouldn’t seem “vibes-based” for you.

an example that may cure you of your “vibes-based” confusion, karp, palantirs ceo, argues clearly for authoritarianism and aggressive surveillance of the general population. he hilariously tries to convince people that the best way to have democracy is to not have it at all. a kind of “to protect your freedom, we’ll take away your freedom” idea that only a certain kind of person falls for.

so yes, people may find it silly to pretend those politics aren’t troubling, particularly when its relating to a government. i’m sure you’re aware that considering political ideas when thinking about how a government is operating isn’t “vibes-based”, it’s integral.

does this one example appease you that it isn’t “vibes based”? if this example doesn’t help you understand, both karp and thiel are not at all shy about their anti-freedom views. they’ve spoken loudly and publicly about them all over the place. if you’re truly curious, there is plenty of info out there you can read.

just be aware, they try to couch their ideas in rhetoric like “the best way to have democracy is to let us take it from you” or “let us surveil you so you can know you have privacy and freedom” kind of nonsense. it’s pretty obvious so i’m sure you won’t be tricked.

Have some personal responsibility for once.

its probably a bit unrealistic to expect children to "Have some personal responsibility for once." id agree with you if a 50 year old said, "omgolly meta, you used trickery on me."

but if the evidence shows they have specifically targeted children, then i can understand the concerns.

and yes, im aware how dangerous it is to declare "lets protect the children" but we also have to recognize this is a messy situation, and one that needs to be sorted out. i dont pretend to hold the answers, but to hand waive it away as hysteria or whatever is probably not a good solution.

i agree with the sibling comment here. someone in a comment section somewhere is crying foul about everything.

sometimes a statement is just a statement. not everyone is taking a “position”.

sometimes a conversation is just a conversation and not a debate.

and honestly, i think we need more of this online. we shouldn’t feel this incessant need to constantly chirp back at someone if we think they’re wrong.

i’d personally like to see us get to a place where we say more often “huh. i disagree with that person and that’s ok” and move on with our day.

i do find it worrying how we get … twitchy … if we can’t respond to literally everything.

yep, i just wrote an overly long comment that was trying to get across what you said in a paragraph. if its a random online, dont over think it. i started to pay way more attention to the real world people in my life and im much much much happier for it.

the main pieces that i had to truly understand in order to recognize and stop most online arguing were:

1) performativeness. if the person responding to you is performing for other readers rather than having a genuine good-faith discussion with you, just move on. i still catch myself being performative sometimes and it grosses me out when i recognize it lol.

2) real world vs online behaviors. if someone is an asshole in the real world, we just wouldnt talk to them. not sure how we've convinced ourselves that online is different. if someone refuses to take the time to respond in a socially normal way, then why would you take the time to respond? if they wont take the time to be social, why would you?

little ass kids learn this shit in like kindergarten. if someone is a dick, no one is friends with them. if my friends and i are in a bar and some random is being an asshole, we dont "debate" them, we move on. again, tiny children learn this shit lol.

3) real people whose opinions you care about. make a list. when i did it, it turned out to be less than 20. the people on your list are the only people you should feel any obligation towards. not randoms on the internet. dont spend your valuable time/energy/mental arguing with random internet assholes. your list of real people are the only ones you should feel any obligation towards because if you value them, they likely value you opinions as well.

4) good faith. you'll know in one or two responses if the person replying is there in good-faith. if they're not, move on.

5) knowledge peers. its ok to recognize that someone is not on the same knowledge level as you in a topic. whether they know more or know less, either way, its ok. if we're lucky we are experts in one or two topics and dipshits in most topics. accept that fact. i know this is tough in our industry, we are overflowing with people who think they're smarter than they are. its ok to recognize that the other person is not your knowledge peer on the topic and adjust accordingly: up, down, or out.

6) conversation vs debate. if someone doesnt recognize there is a vast difference between normal conversation and debate, dont waste your time. honestly, they're typically gross to engage with.

and of course, find real world hobbies. once you have the hobby, it naturally becomes "why would i argue with this dickbag online when i could be doing something way more fun."

Literally every unmanaged…

This is why we can’t have nice things.

i think you’ve hit the nail on the head. it’s the unmanaged part. it isn’t clear to me how We collectively are shocked when these marketing and execs convince us “oh, there’s nothing we can do. having customer service would be cost prohibitive. making sure there are no scams would be cost prohibitive. etc… etc…”

how about you get some customer service and protect us from scams and don’t buy your third private island and fourth mega yacht and have net worth larger than a lot of countries?

oh, that’s asking too much. you’re right, “nothing” can be done.

this is interesting. but i’d be more interested to see a graph starting at the point when developers got their own computer.

then the price of ram over time for whatever the daily functional workstation a developer would have needed then.

i mean this is a graph of the price of GIGS of ram from a time period when the space shuttle needed like 1 MB.

please don’t answer in questions. state specifically what you mean so we can discuss what your point is, not guess what it is you’re implying with vague questions.

America is leading the AI race, and while Chinese open weight models are great, they aren't quite bleeding edge.

this sentiment is far too commonplace in my opinion.

just because the BMW x5 exists doesn’t mean rav4 isn’t used by far far far more people.

the rav4 is close enough for most people to the x5 and way cheaper.

if deepseek is close enough and significantly cheaper, which direction do we think the market will go once the hype trash moves on and people realize how much of the hype trash is just botted algorithms?

i occasionally come across some of the forums and online groups of landlords and the things they have to deal with, particularly in cities with strong protections for the tenants and its interesting to watch the perspectives.

on one hand i feel for some of the landlords who have to deal with some of the very real slacks who go out of their way to be difficult tenants.

on the other we’re talking about homes, by this i mean to stress home over investment. i think we’ve made a terrible mistake in incentivizing people to use homes as an investment. it should be difficult to evict someone from their home, and it should be risky and a pain in the ass to use someone else’s home as an investment.

i feel bad for _some_ of the landlords but from a larger societal perspective we’re going to look back at incentivizing so many people to invest as a landlord as a massive mistake.