I love this analogy.
877 karma · joined November 5, 2023
I love this analogy.
Nonsense. If cell walls ever had the ability to replicate themselves, totally autonomously, without the rest of the cell -- they've very certainly lost that ability. That loss of self-sufficient replication is quite a big "break" in the line.
Your argument might apply to ribosomes, however. The nucleus needs the ribosome for replication every bit as much as the ribosome needs the nucleus. And the ribosomal DNA is one of the very, very rare things that has hardly changed at all in the history of life -- humans and yeast have 75%-identical ribosomal DNA. Yeast!
I agree with you that humans may never be able to understand most of what's going on in biology. But I'm even less enthusiastic about gradient descent. The interesting results in machine learning for biology all seem to amount to better ways of indexing the data we already have (like crystallographically-discovered protein shapes) and interpolating between the existing matches nearest to a query term.
I don't claim to know what "understanding" really truly is, but I do know what it isn't.
Teletubby-candy-crush blingware UI blended with manipulative social upvote features does not engender Göedel-level greatness.
It's the only one that is truly decentralized -- no DNS, no WebPKI, no Tor "authorities". Its DHT is rock solid, second only to bittorrent's. And Tox's NAT-holepunching capabilities are amazing, due to the way they're integrated with the DHT.
Tox was being used for a lot of the stuff that people think Tailscale invented -- five years ago.
A lot of reports and surveys about "level of individualism in country XYZ" use "individualistic" to mean the opposite of "driven by extended family relationships". This is a very misleading way of using the term "individualism". A more accurate term would be "anti-nepotistic". German culture is certainly less nepotistic than the average for the world or even for Western Europe -- but to describe this as individualism is extremely inaccurate.
In which setuid-root program?
They don't do this for their own security. They do it because they're required to. And the requirement is idiotic, which is why the result is... idiocy.
The odds of a setuid root program having this particular, exotic flaw are miniscule. None have been found in the wild.
Apparently this building is also a target pratice range: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-02-03/lapd-inv...
The size tax should be applied to imports, just like VAT is.
Everywhere.
and how quickly to ramp
Yes, that is the one and only tuneable variable. It's a single, obvious scalar, like the interest rate set by a central bank. There's no room for favoritism or shenanighans. Of course, like central bank interest rates, it will be an object of impassioned political debate. That's expected.
which will eventually lead to you having to make some “assumptions” about what size (range) is “too big”
Absolutely false. You're confusing a value with its rate of change. The speed limit on the highway doesn't constrain the length of the road.
I can't afford to invest in Google's soon-to-be-abandonware projects.
No cap is proposed.
No, in fact, it doesn't. Please re-read the comment you're replying to.
There is no cutoff, limit, or threshhold. It doesn't prescribe a naturally-right size any more than a graduated income tax "prescribes a naturally-right amount of income".
I think this has been tried already, unfortunately.
Because if not, people with insatiable appetites will simply seek control of those corporations rather than direct control of piles of money.
Personally I'm an advocate of the exact opposite of what seems to be proposed here: controls on corporate size rather than individual wealth. Living cells don't grow without bounds; at a certain point they get too big and are forced to divide. Simply imposing a tax on corporate size (not a limit) would accomplish this.
Industries where massive size is simply unavoidable (e.g. passenger airplane manufacturing) would simply pay the tax; any economic distortions can be nulled out by reducing the industry's VAT rate in proportion to average size-tax paid by that industry. In all other industries smaller competitors would have the persistent advantage of lower tax costs, allowing them to eventually undermine the bloated colossuses.
Note that this paper contains no optimality proofs.
There's a lot of mathy-looking stuff, but then instead of a proof we get "yeah we took this one particular Markov-chain algorithm and had it play against itself and it failed to generate a gerrymander".
If deployed in real life, an immense amount of power -- and therefore money -- will be at stake: certainly more than enough money to hire persons with intelligence equal to or greater than the creator of "the ShotBurst Algorithm" as consultants.
If an optimality proof is not possible, the only alternative is to test using real humans and (very substantial) real rewards.
Basically it means that whoever owns the "last mile" can't sell it only directly to the customer as part of a larger (bundled) product like "internet access." They have to sell access to that last mile of fiber or copper "unbundled" from anything else (such as "internet access"), and they have to offer it to other ISPs. This is how it has been for ~25 years in NL, and people there understand how important it is.
By forcing the monopoly (local loop) to be a separate company from everything else it makes it totally obvious when there are ridiculous shenanighans. Like, if local-loop company X has only one ISP customer Y, that's an obvious red flag. Also since they are separate companies regulators can subpoena the contracts, communications, and payments which flow between the two companies.
It's essentially the internet version of what the US did to voice telephony after we broke up our telephone monopoly back in the 1970s: no single company was allowed to do both local loop and long distance.
Currently the Netherlands has this for local-loop fiber, and a few counties in the US State of Washington have it due to the odd fact that their local-loop fiber is owned by the electric utility (not the phone or cable companies). It is an awesome system.
Here's the Dutch cases:
- copper (2000): https://www.acm.nl/en/publications/publication/9225/KPN-is-r...
- fiber (2015): https://www.acm.nl/en/publications/publication/15093/KPN-mus...
General background info:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbundled_access