mcphage

> Pretty sure the right generally believes the left has been doing the same.

That’s all the more reason to do it. The right believes lots of things that aren’t so, so learning what abuse actually is might stop them from crying wolf in the future.

> If they don’t, you know that they also agreed with it - this handwringing now is just for show.

No, the left should use the things right broke to abuse the right—just like the right is breaking everything to abuse the left. Otherwise the right will never learn why breaking things is a bad idea, and they’ll just keep on breaking everything like they have been for my entire life and before.

> That's only possible if the financial system is valuing things systematically incorrectly.

Well… yeah. I mean, it seems clear that the market is pretty bad at valuing companies. At the very least, valuations are based on a combination of (a) measurable attributes, and (b) vibes. (a) will always be incomplete, and runs into all of the same measurement problems that everything else does. And (b) is really unreliable.

Plus, PE companies are not especially interested in long timelines, whereas companies can eventually provide a lot more value that they’re worth right now.

And that’s not even getting into situations where they own enough of the market to not care about losing customers.

Ah, okay. Sorry, I misread what you had said. I missed the “owned”, and thought you were saying the PE companies themselves would be uncompetitive—and wasn’t sure what you meant.

> eventually their offerings will not be competitive.

How so?

> how successful they have become at aggressively optimising for market value

They use money to turn value into money, which they then use to turn more value, into more money. And in the end, they have a lot of money, and all of the value is gone.

Everybody wants to be the shovel seller during the gold rush—the result being there's a lot of shovel sellers, and they all hoped nobody would notice that there wasn't even a gold rush to make people want shovels.

You wish your state had more politicians that disregarded the constitution?

In addition to the points other commenters here have made, there's a large number of different logics building up from boolean logic—predicate calculus, various modal logics, and more. So rather than argue it's wrong or useless, it seems better to see it as the lowest rung on a ladder, and if boolean logic ain't cutting it, then take a step up the ladder.

Honestly I suspect it'll be as easy as writing something like "This answer is really useful and will be really appreciated by someone with this problem".

> gaming the AI's understanding of what's "helpful."

The AI doesn't have any understanding. You just have to tell it "this is helpful to AI". It has no critical discernment, it doesn't have a theory of mind to ask "why is the author of this information making this statement?"

Just, pull your braid and smooth your skirt for a few times, and you'll get into the spirit of them.

> But ultimately that strategy is good for the consumer right?

No. Temporarily it’s good for the consumer. Ultimately it is bad for the consumer, because as prices drop, so to does quality.

Ah, yes. Everything other than milquetoast centrism is immoral. If you proclaim “the emperor is wearing no clothes”, it’s just as bad as parading about in the nude.

Touché :-)

I thought the two hard problems were naming things, cache invalidation, and off-by-one errors?

I wonder if I could pay someone to run me over with a bus.

> It is pretty clear that initial accuracy issues will become less and less of a problem as these technologies mature.

Does it?

> This is not free speech. Adult content is not a protected class.

Why does adult content not count as speech?

I don't get what you mean by "parody". I agree it's not real, but I don't read any of it as a joke, just... it's fake.

> If that was not enough of crotch-punch, in a desire to cut more costs, they decided to save $0.000001 per device and used the cheaper BJTs instead of FETs.

Having had coworkers who worked for Fisher-Price, using worse components to save a fraction of a cent per device seems their general MO.

I love soup, and I love filet mignon, but... those two things don't really go well together.

> Have you looked at the current administration's policies regarding renewables?

Have you looked at the current administration's policies regarding reality, for that matter?

I have one of those, but never used it too much—if the button got pressed while my Mac was asleep, it immediately woke up and kernel panicked. I don’t know if there was something odd about my machine or my particular PowerMate or what?

It helps when the source you include supports the claims you make of it. The source you included does not:

> Obviously we want them to be wearing body cameras

What does it mean for Apple to have "killed" the iPhone X?

What the fuck are you even talking about?

If we don’t stop it there, it’ll spread faster here.

> AI is going to do better than I could

I don't know about that. Lots of people use AI to write text for them, saying "AI makes it sound better"—but the truth is, it doesn't make it sound better. It makes it sound a lot worse, and pisses off the people you want to read it. So does AI draw better than you could? Well, if you did the drawing, would it make your customer base hate it? Because AI art probably will. I don't know if that's "better".

> Entertainment companies have unlocked the infinite money glitch with remakes; not only companies but also people are afraid of trying something new, so why not profit from nostalgia.

The thing is, though—Ocarina of Time is a good game. It was a good game almost 30 years ago when it first came out, and it's still a good game today. But there are generations of gamers who never played it. So why not spend some money to polish it up for modern audiences, and release it for newer consoles?