UncleMeat

There has been some good investigative reporting on this.

The answer is yes, they do make a lot of money off of this. But the details are awful. Only like 12% of the revenue actually makes its way to productive campaigning. Donors are older on average than the average voter. And they hit whales. There are elderly people who donate many times a day. These are basically the same kinds of texts that scammers send and they catch people in almost exactly the same way.

Donations to democratic candidates by young people are down compared to prior elections while donations by the elderly are way up. Politicians are making these spam companies rich while they bleed their elderly voters dry and aggravate their future electorate. Idiocy.

This is already a good norm. A substantial portion of the new language features really aren't meant for business logic but instead help library developers anyway.

> I do not think that controlling homework does improve pedagogy at scale.

You are welcome to believe this. You are also wrong.

I am curious if you have ever taught at a university.

We observe that intervention leads to more students learning. I don't believe that "well they are adults they can fail if they want" is an excuse for a university refusing to take steps that they know would improve pedagogy.

I do agree that AI has made this basically useless. Rather than skipping homeworks or doing a bad job the students just cheat and there is no opportunity to notice and intervene. They get all the way to the screen-free final and fail.

Ultimately the goal of education shouldn't just be a filter but it should ensure that as many people as possible learn the material. Homework allows for early intervention by faculty to get people back on track. There really are students who end up succeeding after this intervention.

Now 404ing.

Frankly, a static analyzer that can't detect interprocedural bugs is useless and is something you definitely shouldn't be reaching for an unusual compilation toolchain to access.

No generalities. Stick to specifics. In this case they are saying that Indians are just lazy and foolish workers who don’t care about quality. That’s a trash opinion and deserves downvotes.

But there literally is an opt-out. Users can disable this system if they want.

Why is it an issue? Is it really so socially mandatory that founders get to maintain absolute control over public companies? The super-shares approach that Sergey took was clearly abusive anyway.

Hundreds of millions in grants to states to help conduct elections after being disrupted by covid and hundreds of millions to pay for ads saying that Talerico will take your kid away and forcibly transition them are two different things.

Bold, yes. Important? Also yes.

The state has no problem taking the property of poor people with the intent of delivering public utility. When the richest man in the world can unilaterally intervene in wars and buy up media megacorps to control information transfer, eminent domain starts seeming important.

“Too political” only seems to apply in one direction. Trump winning in 2024 wasn’t flagged.

You are free to tell me in detail what threat to "German culture" exists because of immigration.

I dunno, maybe democratic input into deciding these values? If these machines are going to be as revolutionary as anthropic says such that they risk killing all of us then I think it is rather important that we don't have a CEO-king deciding this for us.

A corporation that needs a gazillion dollars in revenue to survive led by a "rationalist" CEO who thinks that the death of a child is worth 1/4th the death of an adult because children have less complex thoughts will get to decide universal human values for the rest of us. Lovely.

In this case the features are things like "allocating memory on the heap" and "incrementing a pointer."

It isn't like C has some "there be dragons" set of features that are hard to use. The source of exploitable memory safety issues is consistently just foundational language features.

What we have learned over the past many decades is that no amount of discipline solves this. It does not matter how world class your team is. Complex C programs that process untrusted input have security vulnerabilities.

The only way I can see a threat to "German culture" is if "German culture" just means "more white people than some particular threshold."

Predictions made in the 60s suggested that the planet couldn't support more than about a billion people, that continued population growth would lead to worldwide famines, and that extremely harsh policies of population control were essential to avoid the worst of mass death. The predictions were not "well, there is some point where this becomes a problem." The predictions were "mass starvation on the order of many hundreds of millions just around the corner."

> Having the patch probably makes creating an exploit easier. So the number of attacks would increase.

I think that this made sense a few years ago but in today's world it is so feasible to give an LLM a hint and throw some cash at it to find an exploit that I don't think this calculus makes sense anymore.

Oh no, brown people living amongst me.

> Ultimately, the problem with deplatforming is not about mere complaining. Students complain all the time about everything. The problem rather is about public disturbance, heckling, and intimidation. That's what the student activists are regularly engaged in.

Weird then that FIRE regularly complains about students doing things beyond "public disturbance, heckling, and intimidation."

What? The opposite is true. It was treating Hitler with kid gloves that enabled his takeover.

Not always. FIRE also gets pissed off when students complain about a commencement speaker, who was selected by the university administration.

Even worse than that. They multiply by the number of speakers. One even can be five deplatforming attempts if there are five speakers.

No I am not talking about that.

Do you genuinely believe that if Columbia University had an official policy that deadnaming a trans person was an expellable offense and that the official position of the university was that the Israeli occupation of Gaza was a crime and that advocating for Zionist policies was against the rules that Lukianoff would consider this acceptable and that FIRE would take it off their list of criticized universities, as they have done for Liberty?

There are ample examples in the book where student speech is what he complains about. He just merely frames this as threats to the speech of others.

eh. FIRE exempts universities like Liberty from its evaluation of free speech on campus because its free speech restrictions are expected. It also rated public universities in Florida well, despite stated positions that they will comply with Florida legislation to restrict speech on campus.

Lukianoff wrote The Coddling of the American Mind, in which he complains about student speech.

FIRE is indeed not as hypocritical as most "free speech absolutists." But boy howdy do they have different bars for different groups.

Historians fairly uniformly think that this adage is trash.

Cheap virtue signaling? They are literally signing up to pay more for content. Spending money to promote a value you care about is the opposite of "cheap virtue signalling."