Buddahriffic

Yeah, I gotta say that while shit is looking pretty bad on the corporate producer side of things, this society/system has bred a ton of entitled consumers that think their desires are important to anyone that can make or do things.

Even if you’re paying someone for something, that doesn’t mean you can dictate what they do or how they do it. Or even that they need to offer you what they willingly offer others. There’s some people where no amount of money would make dealing with them worthwhile, let alone what they are willing to pay for special treatment.

But with FOSS, there isn’t even the incentive of money greasing the interaction. It’s just pure entitlement. No one owes you anything just because you’re interested in their project or skills.

I believe it is an attempt to use an argument that they will care about. You could write a brilliant piece about how that many bots hurt culture and society but if the ones you want to convince don’t gaf about either of those, they probably won’t even read what you have to say, let alone change anything because of it.

Or, more likely, they won’t even see anything here, at which point that comment becomes more of a “they aren’t even very good at what they want to be good at”.

Like from my pov, the top of the corporate world doesn’t just not care about those things but is actively trying to destroy them because they think they’ll do better in a world where none of those things are as they currently are.

Oh, how long until an AI ends up swatting people. There will probably even be different categories:

1. Legit swat scenario, wrong address (or otherwise incorrect details make it turn tragic)
2. Caller deliberately trying to swat innocent victim, AI goes along with it and adds credibility (not that humans seem to take away much credibility, so maybe this one shouldn’t really be a black mark for AIs if it does happen)
3. AI just misinterprets a caller’s description, deploys swat team
4. AI doesn’t trust the caller’s description, deploys swat team (anyone ever seen an agent start suspecting they were in an adversarial situation where something was injecting things into the context? I have)
5. AI uses dispatching tool incorrectly, accidentally deploys swat team

While we’re talking about glasses technology, it seems like oil resistant coatings have finally gotten really good. My eyebrows are pretty oily and would smear on the top middle corners of my glasses all the time. But my latest pair just has a tiny bit of smudging there. I can press them against my face and wiggle my eyebrows right against them and it’s still only a bit smudged.

It’s not just money but also expertise required to build, run, and maintain the fabs, which are each different specialized skills (or more accurately an umbrella of different specialized skills). While these people certainly exist, I don’t think there’s a large pool of them waiting to get hired. And with memory production being so concentrated in Taiwan and South Korea, it will be difficult to poach workers because (as I understand) both cultures are big on loyalty to the nation.

That’s not to say I disagree that anyone else should try to get into the memory fab game (or chip fab in general) as I think the market needs more players, but it’s easier said than done, even if you have a ton of money to throw at the problem. Look at Intel, they struggled on the fab side and already had fabs going as a leading chip producer. Or AMD, who sold their fabs because they were struggling to keep them profitable.

Though I also think that governments would be smart to subsidize (or outright socialize) chip fabs, as depending on others to make these is giving up on a lot of economic power (which can affect military power, so spreading chip production out more could increase world stability).

It will always be an arms race. If someone develops a new style that doesn’t look like AI, then it’s only a matter of time before an AI model can generate that style.

And the future I see for this arms race is eventually it will be better than humans at producing art that doesn’t look like AI.

I’m at the point where I think AI generated shit should be judged on its own merit rather than for whether or not it’s AI because eventually we won’t be able to tell from other factors and any attempts will end up hurting humans more than the AIs (because they have no feelings to be hurt and will just continue while some portion of the humans will get discouraged and stop bothering to try).

Plus, at least with programming, saying code sucks because it’s AI generated is weak. If a code submission is shit, there will be technical reasons that it is shit that have nothing to do with who (or what) wrote it.

Also the “if you had to pick one” ones. Like it’s a public forum and those are real people. Like I get the whole fantasy and thinking about which one you are most attracted to, but any kind of bonding with others around porn (that isn’t just having sex while watching porn) just seems pathetic to me.

Though it does suck that attention is being diverted to LLM development because it’s so good at giving the illusion of being smart while still getting so much wrong.

She get it real cheap used? They had a decent reputation because the new ones were mostly owned by old boomers that didn’t push them very hard, so they were reliable (relative to the rest of the used car market), though that didn’t help the way they looked or performed.

The Prowler didn’t look quite as lame but got extra lame points for following the trend set by the PT Cruiser.

Apparently the turning radius of the PT Cruiser was comparable to some large ships.

I’d say ugliest of all time went to another car that was featured on Breaking Bad: the PT Cruiser, appropriately used as a car gift that causes insult rather than happiness.

Though I’d bet the actual backstory to WW’s Aztek is Pontiac paid them a bunch of money to use it in the hopes that it would boost sales if the show became popular.

Or those common dumb ones could be attempted by someone just trying to snoop on your phone.

Their income is based on trust: that their target trusts them to keep their end of the bargain when paid. Without that trust, there’s no reason to pay them or engage at all other than to try to trap them.

Yeah, as the other commenter mentioned, git is a distributed source control system, so all clones have the full history (though you can bump up the “starting point” to reduce the overhead of storing all previous commits).

Hosts like github can add more features on top of that, which would have to be backed up separately, but you can automate the repository itself using a single command, which is the same command used to make a clone in the first place.

IMO everyone should have a local backup of everything they can get related to the repo. Like I know with git itself, anytime you clone the repo you get everything, but also the supporting stuff that is in the layer outside of git. IMO the host should mainly be the hub where everyone gets and interacts with the project, while everything else is already good to go in a new location, should the host either screw up in good faith, get corrupted by outside influences, or gets overrun by local or remote powers.

This makes me a bit curious about whether the overall risk to projects is higher from individual local device failure or politics around who controls remote hosting services and the nature of the project.