Being an effective altruist doesn't make someone an intellectual. They teach the boy-in-pond thought experiment the first week of any college elective ethics class. They hand out The Life You Could Save to all harvard undergrads in the first week. Locking yourself into a myopic utilitarianism that avoids all structural critiques seems roughly the opposite of an open intellectual perspective.
It kept some number of people from withdrawing their funds from FTX US yesterday, leaving more money in the pot to return to other stakeholders. This has nothing to do with game theory, what would that even mean!?
If he comes out the other side massively wealthy, then what was there to be "mistaken" about? You're extending an incredibly generous quantity of sympathy to someone that has absolutely not earned even a little of it. Speculating that he had an anxiety attack! I mean, really.
So since this was done at the DNS level, not the hosting level, does this mean if you're running a pi-hole or AdGuardHome you can add some extra redirects for zlib to its actual IPs? I guess you could also just hardcode these in your computer's host file but then you have to do it for every device on your LAN. Assuming their IPs change somewhat frequently, is there any way to do this in an auto-updating way?
It is very funny watching people here not think about how federation works and then, instead of considering they might be missing something, go on a diatribe about how the way they imagined things work in their head doesn't work. Don't get me wrong, it's perfectly fine not knowing how federation works! Just... be humble enough not to immediately issue strongly-worded judgements about things you don't understand.
Thankfully laypeople will always continually excel beyond your professional opinion that they can't understand how to log into one of several websites.
This is unfortunately true and a reason I am finally installing linux at this very moment. The worst were those monthly post-login series of screens trying to override my consent for various options so some PM at Microsoft could hit their quarterly KPIs (because they Measure What Matters) followed by a smarmy screen at the end saying the computer was now "all yours" (so my own home computer I've had for 8 years isn't mine?). It was just such a gross, pushy thing to have respect for my consent clearly trashed in that way. I deserve not to be abused in this way by my own computer I use every day.
I've decided to really dive deep in linux. This is a rest-of-my-life thing now. I'm going through the Arch install process, really enjoying reading the wiki and enabling the services and fiddling with all the options. Windows treated me poorly enough that I no longer care about things "just working". I need to take this stuff into my own hands.
I don't know how 30% overnight growth means it is in trouble. I don't know how a service that isn't geared toward profit is in trouble from a lot more people using it and learning about it. I really, honestly don't know what you mean by that.
Peoples' understanding grows and changes over time. There was a time when the concept of signing up for an interactive website was unknown to the entire world (the advent of this understanding was called Web 2.0). You can find similar BBC articles from that era. I'm not going to argue why people "should" switch to Mastodon because that's up to them. It's there if they finally get frustrated enough being abused by twitter to look up how to switch. It seems like quite a lot of people are feeling that lately, which is why we're having these discussions. It's also untrue that mastodon "proudly has no" content moderation, and I'm sure you know this.
The past few days' discussion of federated social networking have really brought out the... I don't know how to describe them, KPI-brained people? If you've worked in social networking UX for the past decade your entire professional experience & perception of norms have been geared toward funneling people into the optimal mould to which to sell advertisers the right to manipulate them. That's it! All the frictionless stuff isn't about making peoples' lives better, or "delighting" them, or whatever. It's to ensure as many people as possible are available as grist for the manipulation mill. Myopic, this makes the UX actually very bad. I don't need to rant about all the consent-disregarding stuff we've all seen ("Do you want to enable bad thing? Yes/Ask me later") but fundamentally I don't think we should care about the opinions of anyone applying their corporate UX reasoning skills against the idea of federation, appealing to some prescriptive sense of what people care about.
Who cares about "winning the market". Join a server and talk with your friends, colleagues, and like-minded people. Have a good time. Kick a few bucks at your instance for hosting costs maybe. Let the back-alley knife fight for the right to spy on & manipulate you happen somewhere else, never even crossing your mind.
I don't think that's quite true. The product state has exponential size so you'd also need some kind of tensor oracle that could manipulate an exponential quantity of information in linear time.
This is indistinguishable from hoarder logic. Such things straight up don't matter on the scale of decades. The US DOJ has a policy of automatic declassification after 25 years.
The list of things that have to be encrypted 30 years from now is very, very small. I doubt any (many?) people here have contact with any of it. I don't understand your analogy at all, sorry.
Cracking encryption is basically irrelevant as a quantum computing application. Post-quantum encryption algorithm development proceeds apace and the messaging is already "if you want this to still be encrypted 30 years from now, start using post-quantum encryption today." Anybody caught with their pants down the day quantum computers can actually crack 4096-bit RSA simply isn't serious about security.
As someone who has spent a fair bit of time figuring out how to explain quantum computing to people I've come to the conclusion that there are only two possible ways for people to understand it:
(1) mathematically
(2) as a finite list of things quantum computers can and cannot do
and most people are not going to understand it mathematically, least of all money people who have to watch and evaluate 10 powerpoint pitches in a day or whatever. Without the math you cannot possibly explain how superposition and entanglement work, and even that explanation requires your audience already understand how classical computers work. So you are often reduced to saying "Here is what we think quantum computers will be able to do. The timeline for accomplishing this is at least a decade out. Here are some other things that people have said quantum computers can do which they definitely will not be able to do." But then you're purely relying on your audience believing you based on your credentials rather than following their own reasoning from a place of understanding. Someone else can come in with different credentials and say different things, motivated by money or simple ignorance mixed with hope, and now your audience is playing the credential evaluation game rather than the quantum computing capability evaluation game. Mix in low interest rates and a few people who have learned what to say to get attention, and you get the current state of things.
There is a quiet core of real quantum computing research happening, surrounded by a moat of noise and hype that is required to interface with investors and the public. My sincere hope is that this quiet core accomplishes real advances before the music stops.
It's to stop people from building giant reservoirs on their property, which can actually affect the local watershed. There was a case in Oregon about a decade ago where a man built three huge reservoirs on his property.
This has reached new heights when calling USCIS for immigration issues. You have to avoid certain trigger words or the callbot will shunt you into a loop that can only terminate with it sending you an email on how to do something on the website, then hanging up. If you say "operator" it will go on a spiel about how helpful it is and you should ask it a question. If you say "operator" again it will hang up on you. The only way to get to a human is to look in online forums where people share the magic phrases that get it to direct you to an operator. Most of these have followup comments saying "no longer working as of $date". The US government basically hates immigrants or anyone trying to help immigrants and is happy to make things as aggressively unpleasant as possible for them. It isn't a bug, it is intentional.
It struck me this is an entirely arbitrary level of knowledge and people have, culturally, learned quite a lot about online computing in the past few decades. You can easily imagine seeing this posted 20 years ago:
"Right now I can sign up at AOL.com and get to email everyone else who has signed up - where do I sign up for social networking and do I get to interact with everyone else who has done the same?"
There's no reason to think people can't come to grips with a federated model just because they're used to a centralized one.
I've never seen a complaint about scooters that doesn't just boil down to "they aren't obeying the rules". The rules shouldn't be that way! Riding scooters or bikes on the sidewalk is miles safer than riding it on an unprotected roadway, and should be allowed everywhere. You can look up the statistics anywhere for pedestrian fatalities from collisions with cars vs. pedestrian fatalities from collisions with bikes or scooters. They differ by more than a few orders of magnitude. Sidewalks are pitifully small in most places and this is the problem that should be solved (optionally segregating the enlarged sidewalk), not pushing scooters and cyclists out into traffic.
Of course, you bring this up and people will start talking about all the times they were "buzzed" by someone on a scooter, an event which might have led to some bruises or, at worst, a broken wrist. Never mind being buzzed by a car when on a bicycle - a ubiquitous event which can easily end with you losing your balance, falling under the rear wheels, and getting turned into strawberry jam.
Amazes me how closely these forms of transportation are policed when the average hood height of pickup trucks I see everywhere equals or surpasses the height of most women I know. If you had to design a machine to optimally kill pedestrians I don't know how you could do better, beyond appending a thresher to the front. The engineers who designed these should be ashamed of themselves. Living in Atlanta generally has really accelerated my deep dislike of car-centered urban design. It will take a lot more than unbanning electric scooters to change things, but at least it's a step.
For the past few months I've been listening to Robert Caro's The Power Broker on audiobook (which has far and away the best narration I've ever heard - props to Robertson Dean!) and am about 40 hours in out of 65. The book is about a NYC administrator named Robert Moses who operated from roughly 1930-1970, and is quite eye-opening in its depiction of how the sausage is made in public works projects. I greatly recommend it if you have any interest at all in the nature of power within these areas. Robert Moses was famous in his time for "getting things done", which he was certainly successful at - but to think this required him to sweep away all the corruption and graft is absolutely untrue. He turned it to his own ends and operated successfully within an amazingly corrupt system, paying off everybody he could. All of this was non-transparently funded with money from public authorities, like bridge operators collecting tolls whose capitalization and disbursement were purely controlled by him. So we know this public toilet costs $1.7 million, which honestly isn't too astonishing a sum, but another era it also probably would have cost that - you just wouldn't know it unless you dug through the records decades after everyone involved was dead. Also the toilet would have, like, displaced an entire block of ethnic minority families or something. And had an elevated highway built over it.