Look you can’t prove the shoe won’t cease to fit in the future in such a spectacular way that whatever time/risk discount you apply, the SHOE will be SO not FITTING that everything in history else melts into insignificance

Foot sores are the teleological end of humanity

And how exactly does that work for countries that are not the US or China?

How does removing the human element from the administration, control, and understanding of critical swathes of society work out for us?

And why do you imagine blue collars come out ok?

IE I think the dream is a lot darker than that & they’re deliberately trying to put a wedge between so-called white collar workers and everyone else to disrupt dissent.

Really most labour involves using our remarkable brains or it’d be automated already… ai makes it possible to try to capture that bit of the pie and move it from the wage-workers to the machine-owners…

So think the “white collar” bit here is a) correct in that’s what they claim b) disingenuous c) not correct about the reality of the impact if they succeed.

I think it’s more like a wholly novel mode of production in which the means of production lie mostly in their hands for almost _all_ work.

(I’ve not even watched the whole film and this has percolated through to me)

Famously doesn’t the hitman ultimately repent and completely disown the way he’d been using that passage, reinterpreting it as a passionate call for justice against and repentance from the hitmen/Hegseths of the world?

Ie he’s not even using it right?

I think it’s a sentiment that makes intuitive sense to folks who have spent a lot of time in Haskell or otherwise trying to work through elegant abstraction.

If one’s experience of coding is exclusively reams of C or tensor ops in python code, code prob seems more of a curse.

Sometimes as you sculpt it, the clay speaks back to you!

(Reminds me of 1 of the more problematic Qs for “spec driven dev”: for sufficiently good spec engineering, you prob want the spec itself to enable a kind of extended cognition (cf. good mathematical notn.)

But then isn’t your spec ~code?)

Though personally Dario and Demis terrify me more.

“Maybe I didn’t make myself clear… YOU are supposed to be the ones living in fear, not ME”

Or my personal favourite, introduce random bit errors at a rate proportional to their interrogation…

What’s cool about this is the user could press a button if something went wrong and the originals could be restored; we could even do a little ml to work out which ones “mattered“ to user experience

I think perhaps Vance imagined that US politics would be senior partner in this little coming-together…

You have no idea how grateful I am *someone* got the reference!

(As in, it is unclear to me any amount of goodwill or attempt to govern it to reflect Canadian values can overcome the fundamental dangers, harms, and problems of the technology as developed)

AAAAAAAHHHHHHHH

two men are talking to each other and one of them says that 's not how it works ALT: two men are talking to each other and one of them says that 's not how it works

(It’s already here in enough ways I can pretty confidently aver)

Someone I knew and wanted to see again died of pancreatic cancer.

Some people are sent to try our faith in political nonviolence.

An mRNA treatment for PANCREATIC CANCER was in trials, among many other uses. Choosing to end this research is choosing to sentence millions to an early, painful death

Like, the implicit claim is the “agents” will inevitably suck so what’s the difference.

Maybe so and fits with a lot of SRE lived experience…

… but sucks for the ones who thought they saw a way to “better” and were working towards it before “crappy” became so cheap it was impossible to compete.

Which is neat, because it also reads as an explanation of what the more quality-inclined computer scientist software engineers find so offensive in the project. (Whether you agree with them or not)

“why don’t you just trash all the phones if you think like that then” is a line I’ve (unironically) had used against me when (unwisely) suggesting maybe regulating AI…

Funny how the same slightly absurd thing can hit so differently across divides

Of course I’ve always wondered about Marianne: if you think about the composition, it’s really only the *reactionaries* who get a good look…

Look if it doesn’t have a woman exposing her breast (one assumes to encourage the menfolk, at least the straight uns) it’s just not a proper revolution.

For Canadians, think of it as burning the White House mark 2.

This is a crass and hideous piece of aesthetic vandalism and I WANT IT BUILT.

Maybe the Iranians will make it a condition of reopening the strait.

And by some very odd coincidence, that was exactly when the Spectator began championing him…

Also... I just don't know what you're on about with "norms" and Oracle and Microsoft. There are a bajillion presses.

Tbh I & I think the vast majority of people would find the analogy between culture and software totally uncompelling.

Plus I don't know why you think SW somehow subverts copyright. Last I looked it was the only kind of text that could be simultaneously patented, a trade secret, and copyright.

I think you would find this attitude a very hard sell to the vast majority of book-writers whose work you are, de facto, devaluing.

(Yes I know _in principle_ you probably value these people as an idealist, but in the absence of a plan...)