Terr_

6 ms·

1.
by Terr_ 2d ago
[delayed]
2.
by Terr_ 4d ago
You can tell it isn't, because the people with all the capital have a reduced set of choices for screwing you over.
3.
by Terr_ 4d ago
I just had a crazy idea: Are there any ways we (consumers) could leverage the (bad) DMCA "anti-circumvention" laws? Ex: 1. The noise happening in my house is copyrighted. 2. I protected my copyright by blocking the TV from transmi
4.
by Terr_ 4d ago
I wrote that in to deter kinda-bad-faith responses, where someone tries to play at being an evil-genie, inserting unreasonable flaws into the gaps, like: "But what if it triggered all the time? On purpose!? " The point is that et
5.
by Terr_ 4d ago
A quixotic legal dream: All consumer data-surveillance must take the form of an opt-in monthly payment plan, which either side can cancel. So the TV gets advertised as "$$$, but basically $$ if you sign up to be surveilled and get a $&
6.
by Terr_ 4d ago
I endorse the cynicism, but I feel that's moving the goalposts a tad, from "good is impossible" to "good is improbable". Or, in a heavily-paraphrased nutshell: Politician: "Watch-words are ALWAYS evil-mod
7.
by Terr_ 4d ago
> In order to detect a wake word then they must be collecting or recording ambient conversations. There's a risk here that we will talk-past one another while using different meanings of the same words, so let me offer a scenario: A
8.
by Terr_ 4d ago
You're doubling-down on your mistake, by pretending the first clause of the sentence--which bounds the category--didn't exist. _______ Me: "Futuristic [thermonuclear power] doesn't necessarily mean [fission], although
9.
by Terr_ 4d ago
> and you still get comments like this I said "fuel", not "batteries", so why are you giving a complaint that seems aimed at people who downplay next-ten-years electrification? If you didn't misread my commen
10.
by Terr_ 4d ago
> Any investigative agency already could trivially get this data through already existing means. What do you have in mind? Subpoenas and search-warrants exist but are not trivial.
11.
by Terr_ 4d ago
Futuristic "fuel" doesn't necessarily mean hydrocarbons, although I doubt something else would be widespread in in just one decade.
12.
by Terr_ 4d ago
> It would be interesting to see if courts object to that. It is also a measure of how enshittified and exploitative thing have become, that we look towards litigious copyright holders for assistance...
13.
by Terr_ 4d ago
Plus soon we'll be paying based on secret parasocial influencing agendas. It's now possible to put a complex spin/bias on whatever the system shows (or whatever it chooses to bury) in a really easy and scalable way. Ex: Dairy
14.
by Terr_ 5d ago
Who then share it within private group chats, literally right next to assurances that they are "currently clean on OPSEC"...
15.
by Terr_ 5d ago
> mass production epoch, from textiles to electronics I see this comparison a lot, and I think it's a trap, because it invites us to confuse scaling duplicates with scaling design changes . Duplicative mass-production was always
16.
by Terr_ 5d ago
Perhaps a shorter and less formal version of this science news cycle: https://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174
17.
by Terr_ 6d ago
I think that's just because every analogy gives an entire "second front" of ideas for a hostile recipient to find a "flaw", when they ignore the intended boundary between the stuff that does/doesn't matter
18.
by Terr_ 6d ago
Let's be careful to separate capable-of from motivated-to. Those three "can't even monitor" situations can be traced to blocs with both (A) a financial profit if they succeed and (B) some non-clandestine political clout
19.
by Terr_ 6d ago
Right, it's a chain of trust between the layers. The link I choose next to me helps determine the quality of successive links, whether I inspect them or not. When I buy a wooden shack from a carpenter, I'd never expect them to c
20.
by Terr_ 6d ago
A related outrage: Companies that are happy the law enshrines their private rules/standards, but they want to charge you for access. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/04/congress-no-one-should...
21.
by Terr_ 6d ago
Somehow I'd never encountered that shorthand before, so for anyone else wondering it's probably intended as the opposite of "/s", gen uine rather than s arcastic.
22.
by Terr_ 6d ago
But just think of how many many things you could have bought with the same knowledge which would have been mediocre or failed entirely.
23.
by Terr_ 6d ago
I think a way-out exists if we accept that "shopping isn't politics" [0]. In a nutshell: * Bad news: "Voting with your wallet" is actually pretty ineffective. Big companies know it, diversify around it, and they&#x2
24.
by Terr_ 6d ago
Yeah: Spirit Airlines didn't become ultra-awesome with the power of all its "data", it went bankrupt. I'm not sure on how much of the flight/sales/maintenance data is being used, versus simply a big archive of
25.
by Terr_ 6d ago
Yeah, certainly a reason to have failsafe timers and dead-man switches when testing new things. While I did read The Expanse , when I think of that class of dangers, what pops to my mind is an old short story Neutron Star (1966) [0]. A f
26.
by Terr_ 6d ago
https://smbc-comics.com/comic/rite-on > "No matter what you do, when we find something weird in ancient history we will decide it must've been part of a fertility rite."
27.
by Terr_ 6d ago
Similar to "needs to be a platform" [0], another variant is "be a data company" where somehow the underpants gnomes will transform your moat of stored information into profit. [0] Read: "Needs to be pitch-able to in
28.
by Terr_ 6d ago
Conversely: Feature X is often used... Because to drive adoption someone made it mandatory for a certain workflow and it nags everyone else so they "engage" with it just enough to make it go away. (Looking at you, "AI" b
29.
by Terr_ 6d ago
Reminds me of this 2014 post "Programming Sucks" [0], which touches on some similar issues of getting disconnected from reality in a microcosm that always "ought" to be better than it is. > All programming teams are c
30.
by Terr_ 6d ago
In terms of comparisons to human lifespan, I think this one is interesting: If you can somehow accelerate/decelerate at a constant human-acceptable 1G, time dilation means almost anywhere is reachable in a human-lifetime. That coinci

More ›