AndyMcConachie

These are also the geniuses who thought Fukuyama was right when he declared the end of history.

And before that it was the #1 result for most Google searches.

I use a projector plugged into a tiny Linux box.

The CIA and NED have been creating color revolutions for decades. This isn't new.

https://nonsite.org/change-agent-gene-sharps-neoliberal-nonv...

The problem is one of information provenance. A search engine shows you stuff that other people have written. It might be right or it might be wrong. But you get to judge that yourself, because you have an idea of where the information came from.

With AI summaries they take that away from you and claim the provenance for themselves. Google is now giving you the answer and they hide where that answer came from. Therefore, you cannot properly evaluate the provenance of the information presented. It still might be right or wrong, but you can no longer properly evaluate it based on source.

Yes. Making meaning often requires context. The study of this is often referred to as pragmatics.

> They already do that, in Europe. I assume that it works, as I don’t hear about this level of stuff, over there

As an EU citizen and resident I strongly recommend you not take EU privacy controls seriously. The GDPR functions well as a means of tax collection, but it really doesn't work all that well as something that actually protects people's privacy.

Having just a little background in traditional linguistic discourse analysis help understand why this is.

The best basic explanation I've found is this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORgKY9AlybA

The real answer is to take a class in discourse analysis and learn how to pick apart sentences. Once you start understanding how language works in the brain you can start to see better how LLMs fail.

Amazon regularly sends me spam emails.

As bad as this is, I don't see how it is fundamentally different to the ways in which research grants have been doled out before. Hasn't it always been somewhat political?

Granted, the methods used here are asinine. But I don't think USG research has ever been apolitical and there have always been special words that grant writers knew to use and not use. Part of being in research is getting grants and it has always been a silly game. This just seems to take the silly game to whole new levels.

No. You're simply wrong.

But how many times can you take a piece of Ikea furniture apart and put it back together again? I have friends who have moved apartments with the same Billy bookshelf 2-3 times and if they tried it one more time the thing would collapse.

Not to belabor the metaphor as heavily as my friend's Billy, but there's a maintenance corellary to be made here. Most Ikea furniture can be put together once, in one place, and left there for a long time. But once you want to change it in place it may just collapse.

Embrace, extend, destroy. This has always been MS. They basically haven't changed since 1990.

Why do people keep buying all this garbage and putting it in their homes?

>> The myth of DNS “propagation” needs to die.

> What's the actual issue? Are you being frustrated by people laboring under the assumption that DNS records are being sent by carrier pidgeon or something?

The actual issue is that some people misunderstand how DNS works, and the notion that records propagate doesn't help people understand it better. It propagates a misunderstanding of DNS.

I would expect online video games to be a more important driver.

China doesn't seem to really care about copyright or other forms of intellectual property. We'll see how long this stuff stays closed and opaque. Not that I believe Chinese chip manufacturers have some desire to open everything up. I just imagine that at some point they'll reach parity with the state of the art and will lack a desire to lock everything up behind trade secrets and contracts, at least initially.

Intellectual property favors the incumbents. If they're the upstart they may want everything to be open because their margins will be better anyway. If they're always going to be the cheapest why should they care about building an intellectual property moat?

But I'm just random dude on the Internet theorizing about the future ;)

I know people that work as contractors for the Dutch government. The government doesn't save money by hiring them through contractors. They cost more through contractors. But contracting allows private companies to act as gatekeepers and pocket some cash for essentially supplying full time employees. It's a form of corruption by well connected private contracting companies.

I love Strawberry Music Player. Works great and does everything I want.

As someone who was impacted by Cisco's first ever round of layoffs, I can say with confidence that your statement was also true 25 years ago.

One of my first jobs was working on Telephony User Interfaces (TUIs). Everytime I see the term TUI I can't help but think of that.

For people who don't know this version of TUI, it's the ole, "Press 1 for X, Press 2 for Y" kind of interfaces that you use over a phone. Think voicemail text-to-speech and automated speech recognition.

The reason the DNT header failed is because there is no way to enforce it. The browser can set the flag, but there's no way to ensure it's actually respected. There are no protocol police.

What pisses me off the most is that there are companies making billions of dollars off the labor of others and many of them don't even acknowledge it.

We're getting beeped at constantly by the various devices we surround ourselves with. I can't help but comapre it to changing a baby's diapers everytime it needs our attention. So I've started referring to all of these annoyances as 'digital diaper changing'.

You're screwed. This has been the way for a while now. You cannot exist in society without a smart phone and it's only going to get worse.

I also use mailbox.org and use my own domain for email. Not sure what issue the author ran into.

Shorter chapters allow me to have more frequent natural break points. I often have limited time to read, or the time I have is broken up into shorter chunks. So books with shorter chapters are easier to stop and then pick back up.

You have a point, but two counters to this:

1) You don't need to capture a large part of the market to make a profit. The market for smartphones is large enough that even capturing a small percentage of it can be profitable.

2) Privacy is increasingly becoming a differentiator and I predict privacy will be increasingly important as a differentiator. Just because no company has successfully managed to market privacy benefits doesn't mean there is no market for it. There's a lot of marketing potential in terms of privacy that companies like NordVPN, Incogni, and DeleteMe have figured out. People are clearly willing to pay for privacy.

> Something I don't think is well understood on HN is how driven by ideals many folks at Anthropic are

I don't think you understand how capitalism and corporations work, friend. Even if Anthropic is a public benefit corporation it still exists in the USA and will be placed under extensive pressure to generate a profit and grow. Corporations are designed to be amoral and history has shown that regardless of their specific legal formulation they all eventually revert to amoral growth driven behavior.

This is structural and has nothing to do with individuals.