AviationAtom

It's been discussed elsewhere in the comments.

It's affordably prices and just works.

It's that awkward time when it really dawns on you that mortality is really a thing. Prior to that you feel very far removed from it, so it isn't much concern.

I would argue that it was the other way around before. It was also people with non-progessive views actually being entirely banned from the site. What is worthy of banning can quickly turn subjective, when really there are limited things both sides should agree are not permissible on a platform.

Much to your point of media having an apparent dislike for Musk, I had noticed Business Insider dominating anti-Musk coverage. It was so much so that when they published a flattering article about him I was shellshocked.

I think people assume that because Musk is highly successful that he is a normal person, worthy of being judged by such a standard. From the outside nothing seems normal about him to me. He is almost certainly on the spectrum, yet fairly highly functional.

I attribute half of the hatred for him not because of his behavior, but because of the general anger towards the billionaire class.

I think the sharp divide in perception of him shows that polarization within America has reached unhealthy levels. I won't invoke the terms used to describe people believed to be pro or anti Musk here, but I think most know them. I wish we could get to a point where we discuss less about people and more about their individual actions.

The most technical of people seem to have remained using Mastodon, but others seem to have migrated back to Twitter.

I'd say I'm surprised by the persistent pessimism regarding Twitter, but I'm not.

I don't think a sizable portion of people are even willing to entertain the idea that it might still having a place in the Internet ecosystem. Maybe not in exactly the same form as pre-Elon Twitter, but still a place.

How different do you think the article might have read had it been written two years later than it was?

I posted about it in another comment but will restate it here too. The ARK Venture Fund has exposure to it (roughly 7% of the fund).

I think you replied to the wrong thread

I think most all of AI is undervalued right now but that is just my personal take

Indeed, but it's impossible for unaccredited investors to get exposure through any other means right now, other than perhaps working for them and gaining equity.

I tend to think the diversity of the fund is more of a strong point. Trying to pick only winners is tough, but picking a variety of those that look most likely to succeed in the space is much more likely to yield overall good returns.

I just tried it again and it's still working for me. Were you accessing it in any special way? It should have just been a matter off adding the app to your Slack instance.

MosaicML just sold to DataBricks at a 600% premium to the initial investment.

Holding the fund is not like typical investing, as hedge funds are meant to be long-term holds, with limited exit periods (quarterly) and distributions (no more than a percentage of the overall) from the fund.

Most the explosive growth in startups happen before they IPO, but traditional investors have been shut out from it until recently, due to the SEC believing it gives average investors too big of a noose to hang themselves with.

Like any investment (or anything in life) you should only commit what you're comfortable seeing disappear, but bigger risk exposure means the potential for bigger gain. Imagine the folks starting up all these ventures, if they fail they're left with nothing, in many cases.

As for their hiring: I think they really want only the cream of the crop. The top performers that can make maximum impact on their product.

It can also be accessed through Slack

I think the reason Claude isn't further than it is now is due to a singular goal:

Do no evil

I feel they are what Google was to search engines when they burst onto the scene. They'd rather take time to get it right than to push out a product they don't feel meets it's mark.

Now that they have entered open beta I expect them to rapidly iterate. If their product is as good as I feel it already is, in comparison to competitors, then I can only imagine what it will be doing in a year's time.

(Disclaimer: I do have exposure to Anthropic through my investments, but nothing I said is based on that alone)

Through the ARK Venture Fund

Not sure what kind of equity you negotiated when signing on with the company, but it's going to pay off handsomely.

Wish I had more exposure to the company, to better join the ride, but I'll take what I have now.

Keep contributing to the awesome efforts going on there.

Now that it's entered open beta it's going to iterate rapidly. I had been using it fairly extensively, alongside other LLMs, through Slack and was always most impressed by it's output over the others.

(I do hold investment in Anthropic, but do not base my statements on that)

It's been available through Slack for some time now

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

I have no doubt my investment in this company will pay off handsomely. Their product is top notch when I have put it through it's paces.

Oracle today is what Microsoft was 15 years ago. It would be shocking to see Oracle resemble what Microsoft is today to open source, but I'm not holding my breath for it.

That is the freemium model and more or less the model that I thought the open source community had long ago agreed was acceptable. Open source development for free is cool with what spare time you have, but at a certain point you have to pay your own bills to keep a roof over your head, food in your belly, maintain your health, and actually be able to enjoy your life. Value added features and support have long been the way open source companies have been able to do that.

If it had been in American waters, and they had been detected, then the USCG would have taken them aboard and to shelter while their status was sorted out.

Some very cool videos from lineman showing high voltage air switches opening under even a reduced load.

I think most folks don't understand electric components don't like being manipulated under a load.

They already somewhat have.

View the demo in normal mode at https://fingerprint.com/ and then open it again in Incognito

You not giving any personal data to Mullvad, only sending Bitcoin, doesn't really change that they can still potentially see any of your traffic entering and exiting their infrastructure, to include being able to connect your residential IP to a currently active session.

Tor isn't much better, as security services have been able to gain enough control or surveillance ability to match traffic as it ingresses and egresses Tor, to then identify where the traffic originated from.

With enough of a tinfoil hat you can perpetually be paranoid and chasing "anonymity" for a long while. It's really about what you're trying to conceal and what effort you put in to securing the infrastructure at the beginning and end of an end-to-end encrypted session, as well as the level of security of the end-to-end encrypted session itself.

I think you touch on a valid point: we should be focusing less on where our traffic egresses and more on ensuring all of our traffic is end-to-end encrypted as much as possible, as well as ensuring any "meta data" (i.e. DNS) is encrypted too.

I'd dispute that most access is obtained through botnets. I see it as generally obtained through the user themselves. I will agree that the provider may not be clearly notifying the user what they are agreeing to by utilizing their software, hiding it in their lengthy Terms of Service, but the user is agreeing to it by installing their software and accepting their ToS.

This was a huge controversy not long ago. The biggest issue I see from it is that it opens the user up to a fair amount of legal liability for what other users of the VPN service do while connected to the VPN service. If the user failed to understand what they agreed to in installing the VPN service and agreeing to it then it can make for some very awkward conversations when law enforcement comes knocking.

As a cybersecurity person I also think users fail to understand what information they are potentially making available to some rando running the VPN software on their PC. I can (and have before) see any traffic that you are sending through that VPN, and potentially tamper with that traffic. If you thought Nord or PIA could not be trusted with your traffic then how do you feel about Joe Random being able to see and tamper with your traffic?

I'm not opposed to mandating people work from the office, but I do think changing it up after people have altered their lifestyle accordingly is crappy.

Here's how I think they should have done it:

- If you live within X distance you must return X days out of the week - Employees living further must come on-site X amount of times per year - All new hires must work from in office all or X days out of the week

He didn't have a spare closet to put them in