snugghash

7 ms·

1.
by snugghash 5y ago
Seems like a rare backpedal by Apple, which I'm happy with. Also happy with them doing more for right-to-repair. It's very unbecoming of a 2T company to punish suppliers for leaking a chip. Still, seems like the internal Apple cul
2.
by snugghash 5y ago
I'd like to modify that to be even more long-term - progress is where they know everything about you and can assist in everyone's best interest. The individual is not necessarily the limit of happiness. IMO it's a very limite
3.
by snugghash 5y ago
Why exactly? Information is good - if you were a single organism you'd want as much information at your disposal as possible. Indeed that's why we wear fitness trackers, we don't think our legs have privacy rights. The proble
4.
by snugghash 5y ago
You mistake the way western governments are structured with "governance of a society". The CCP is far more than the traditional there branches of the western democratic government. Societies self-govern and create structures. Some
5.
by snugghash 5y ago
I'm not in the field. For anyone else curious about relationship to things like TLA+ ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TLA%2B ) - the discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15583377 was gr
6.
by snugghash 5y ago
Thank you for the thoughtful expansion. I completely agree with you on the level you're thinking about this, and I also agree that our tech level in collaboration is basically amplified mob rule, same as 100 years ago: https:/&#x
7.
by snugghash 5y ago
Yes, but prioritization is everywhere - maybe the EU finds that their ideals and principles were an instance of the XY problem, and privacy doesn't matter at all. I'm not saying they're right, I'm saying they're &qu
8.
by snugghash 5y ago
My metric here is "grabby success" or growth. I alluded to this in my comment but essentially, if you have a society, civilization, entity, species, w.e., it's almost guaranteed to be different in some way to other such enti
9.
by snugghash 5y ago
Seems like the CCP was "right" all along. All of our governments are simply playing catch-up at this point. Unless the western-influenced can prove their superiority with growth and progress, I think everyone here has to acknowled
10.
by snugghash 5y ago
Our tooling for communicating ideas and finding good ones is equivalent to mob rule, same as a hundred years ago, just amplified. More at my older comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29051178 > Pop onto stormfro
11.
by snugghash 5y ago
You're missing an important point here, that Eric Weinstein brings up a lot. The goal of science is finding truth, but the mechanism of how it happens right now is very tied to the "goal" of each study. Goal-less data collect
12.
by snugghash 5y ago
That's better as "the effects of my pretend actions are very real" than anything more subtle
13.
by snugghash 5y ago
The core problem here is that our technology for discourse is basically twitter and "voting with likes". The algorithms are optimized for attention and likes, so the mob wins - not the best argument. IF we fixed THAT problem (with
14.
by snugghash 5y ago
I think it's a fairly well-understood causal inference problem to figure out how much effort (money) needs to be spent on other people for GDP growth from that one person to offset the money spent on them by society. We just need someo
15.
by snugghash 5y ago
I just noticed that my jaw dropped for the first time in recent memory. Wow. Slow clap. UK, US, China... just wow
16.
by snugghash 5y ago
tbh, probably exactly how the current uni works, with vacuum energy and virtual photons communicating things in QED. Somethings probably randomly fail, but because entropy and time is randomly selected we find ourselves in the successful on
17.
by snugghash 5y ago
What? The core aspect of FB/Twitter/etc. is twofold 1. No guaranteed-attention obligation from your circle, so you're free to share more things 2. Algorithms for YOUR attention so you see what you want to see in the order of
18.
by snugghash 5y ago
You do realize there's an edit button? It's next to the timestamp etc., the comment metadata
19.
by snugghash 5y ago
I think you're forgetting an important stakeholder here: humanity. We as a unit need to do things in an efficient way so we can save our limited resources for other, more important things. Developers and their time matters more for the
20.
by snugghash 5y ago
I think it's pretty daft to not consider an investment (by all of humanity, which I get is hard) which can improve efficiency by a lot, for all of time until we direct BMI. At some point in the sliding scale it becomes worthwhile to ca
21.
by snugghash 5y ago
Is Otter.ai's tech any better?
22.
by snugghash 9y ago
I'd argue this is barely worth the time spent. You'd use at least a hundred services of this sort, with a flux of at least one a week. 2-3 hours reading up on intricacies, setting up backups for your data? It's a crazy amount
23.
by snugghash 9y ago
I think that's because the service is hosting the data, not the data itself. Holding onto the data which you (expect to) own is pretty much akin to a person taking care of a pet for money and when the money is not paid, keeps the cat.
24.
by snugghash 9y ago
For open source commercial, it's the same as for-profit. They'll probably get a discount. For open source non-profit, it'd still be NC and therefore legal?