BiteCode_dev

I actually opened a yandex mail account 15 years ago because, since I was going to be tracked, at least it would be from people who have no friendly contact with most gov entities and companies in my society.

Sad.

We have, we just have much, much better conditions for food, hygiene, personnal safety and medicine.

But have worse hormonal health (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7063751/), and are less fit (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4033061/). The flynn effect also seems to decline in some parts of the world: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289619301679

It just doesn't compensate the immense gains tech created.

Turns out it's ok to be weaker if you don't have to worry about dying of parasites, malnutrition, cold.

Which, you could conclude, means the individual is weaker, but the species is stronger.

It used to be the polite thing to disclose that you used a translation app. In fact, traditionally, you disclose when you translate anything so people know the context in which to interpret your text.

In the same way, I wanna know if a book is written by some famous people just ghost written.

Of course, the point is moot. Somebody using AI to write a blog post is unlikely to be self conscious enought to thing it's necessary to disclose it in the first place.

For all its faults, this is one of the things the Python typing system gets right. It's dynamically introspectable at runtime, so you can define type, parsing and validation in one go with stuff like pydantic.

I had one machine on my entire client's network that could never download a LibreOffice document without it being corrupted.

Turns out it was kaspersky intercepting network calls, and deciding it was a very dangerous piece of file, and it would truncate it completely silently.

After wasting a non-billable afternoon on it, I just disabled the antivirus out of desperation and figured it out.

The solution was to generate a self signed certificate and TLS the connection and prevent the bugger to MITM us.

Since this day, even on a local network with behind a proxies and using a VPN, I still use https for all the services if I'm allowed.

Why would they treat it as toxic?

They don't have a moral code, and they don't pay any price for mistakes.

They have zero incentive.

Too bad you can't use the app if you don't have a google account.

You are exactly the too good to realize all the problems you solve profile from the article.

Maybe ES' companies gave they a contract stating they assume all the risks and take not a cent unless they succeed, including reparation on failure, just to win the market.

Yep, see also "lies, damn lies, and feedback on arch linux":

https://www.bitecode.dev/p/lies-damn-lies-and-feedback-on-ar...

I think your title is as mature as people using $ in microsoft name in the 9O's. And I'm pretty anti microsoft, don't like google, and hate having AI shoved everywhere.

But this is lazy, and doesn't help debating the technical implications of this blog post.

Yes, espacially exotic tld. I have a ".email" domain name, and I get 2 to 3 instances a year of either rejected forms, or sneakier, just confirmation email that never come until I use a .com address.

I refused an interview from google in 2010ish, because it was already dubious with all the tracking and advertising they were doing, as well as the rising censorship.

So if you decided to go in 2017 with all that happened since, your moral compass was already broken with google's. Snowden already revealed what all that data was used for with program like PRISM. You already seen the total lack of interest in preventing scams in their ads as long as it brings money. You've seen the antitrust fines. The tax avoidance schemes. The election influence concerns over youtube content.

What I read is "I know have made enough money from Google immorality, I can virtue signal by taking an early retirement and pretend I'm a great person".

The AI voice is annoying, the content is as personal a a vanilla yogurt but the animation is clear.

A Canadian friend brought me back 2 bottles of local maple syrup as a gift. Ok, I'm a pretentious Frenchman when it comes to food and I do think most North Americans have no idea how real food tastes.

But that stuff, I didn't know how it really tasted before trying the OG thing.

Globalisation gave us the illusion of experiencing the world.

Social credit score affects all your actions as a citizen, and can restrict your liberty as a citizen. E.G: a cop don't like you because you sleep with his sister, they charge you on false pretense, and now your internet is more restricted or you can't take some trains.

Banking credit score only affect your ability to get a loan. You sleep with a banker sister, and... they can't do shit because there is no money trail and you can apply for a loan elsewhere. You will only be rejected for a loan if fail to pay some of your existing loans. Reasonable.

I'm not American, and my answer solely focuses on the fact the social credit score is the most dystopian thing ever created by modern dictatorship.

Which is an answer to guy saying people idealize china these days, thanks to effective propaganda from the regime.

Want to criticize the US? Go for it. That's just not the topic.

And until you can wear a Tiananmen Square t-shirt in a public street in Beijin, any good thing China is doing is moot for its population. It's still in a dictatorship.

Not social credit score, this is something different.

I'm not American. And the discussion is about the credit score system.

We were discussing cancer, and instead of talking about it, you tried to avoid saying bad things about it and answered "isn't diabetes bad as well?".

I assume now you are a China propaganda account and will stop answering to you.

They are probably people, paid for it. The comment are too well made.

But also some are just real people from HN that are the worst kind of dumb : uneducated but smart, so they think their opinion is valid.

This is where the "history at schoolis useless" people show their true color.

No, the social credit system can restrict your basic freedom, including the freedom of moving, without a judge being involved.

The fact you are casually talking about it is infuriating.

It's like taking about the yellow star and stay "isn't it like the pins in the US".

Feels like its the same poeple saying locked down OS stores are great because security and chrome engine in all browser is fantastic because then everything is standardized.

But worse because here we are talking deep human topics.

Such long period of peace made people forget about how the world work. And clearly studing history in school ks not working. I guess in the US they are getting a new shot right now to remember.

That's how the new 1927 starts.

It will be in the history books.

First, let's acknowledge that when the actions of some people lead to endangering a human life, it's natural to be angry about it.

Personally, when anger is justified, I feel more comfortable with people who clearly and openly express it.

I find them more reliable, more honest, and usually better people to be around.

By my standards, I'd even consider the style very mild, considering a life is on the line.

I would also consider it normal to be on the receiving end of such language if my own work resulted in such a situation. That would cause me to pause and reflect.

The intensity of feedback is information. If everything is bland, it's harder to know how important something is or not. Logic has a limit because you don't have all the parameters from the other side.

It works the other way around. The overuse of superlatives and day-to-day outrage is equally unproductive.

This is not the case here, IMO.

Until they learn to do that. So cat and mouse. So nothing new.

If you know happy rich people that don't have a job, you got your counter example, and one is enough.

I do.

People usually need to have a purpose, but it doesn't need to be a job.

That's a different issue than OP's superlative claims and is something we as a society need to be working on.

But it's not AI related, it's true every time the eich and powerful privatize benefits while making the costs and risks to society.

It's a more global and important problem.

I still haven't seen anybody demonstrating we have to do such thing.

We do have to spent a bit of each for any new tech advancement, but the alarmist, disproportionate claim you make is really not helping.

ArcelorMittal Dunkirk rolling & steel complex alone is ~450–550 hectares (more than colussus) and consume 2.23 TWh/year (colussus is ~2.6 TWh/year at 300 MW continuous load) and of course, water consumption for metal working is gigantic.

That's just ONE single facility in France.

I don't think anybody who understands the basics of civilization would want to go back before the Industrial Revolution.

Tech has a cost, and you usually pay a lot more at the begining of creating it.

Does it cause problems? Sure. Should we take it very seriously? Definitely.

But just repeating internet outrage is not a way to make good decisions.

7 litters...

It's actually fantastic for job interviews. Use that trick with my clients when asked to review candidates.