s2g

Would my life be that much worse if I paid 10 bucks a month for google search?

Yes, far more dangerous.

Control information and you control the populace. You don't need to use guns because the people don't know whats going on, you can prevent people from organizing, you can use misinformation and propaganda to control people. Control of information and control of speech is a massive amount of power. I'd rather google had access to a few nukes, honestly.

A lot more regulation could be done without actually resorting to censoring media.

3600 with 32GB ram and 1TB ssd.

I'd probably get one, but I don't use it for work and my 2013 is still trucking along just fine.

Actually I could probably get a decent chunk of money for it and then use that to help finance a new one. hmmm

I'll wait and see if the keyboards are still crap.

Frankly I think your response is more driven by ideology than mine.

Yes, far too powerful. Both in society and within the tech sector.

Break 'em up!

I thought they made people re-interview?

No, it's just capitalism in action.

The answer is that google doesn't give a shit about false negatives.

They know they will get enough people applying several times that they can just toss out qualified people all day. Eventually enough get in.

> and didn't take too much of their time or resources when visiting

No, why would he. He got what he wanted already.

> People criticizing Musk probably haven't lifted a finger themselves to help the kids.

True, but I recognize that I don't have any relevant skills or any way to help from the other side of hte pacific.

The main difference is I'm not tweeting about how I'm totally going to solve this, and then getting credit doing pretty much just that.

> Elon Musk was asked to help

wasn't he asked to help by one of his twitter fans who eat up the "ELON IS LITERALLY TONY STARK" kool-aid?

It's also possible to just use a dangerous and potentially tragic situation for PR, as a distraction from your business issues and increasing criticism for unhinged behaviour on twitter.

> Where was say, the US Navy?

Well, 1 former SEAL was dying trying to get the kids oxygen.

Musk didn't do anything but tweet about this. He deserves no credit, no praise.

They raise prices.

They start selling the data (oh wait it's google, just terrifying services based on their data).

The abandon large amounts of costly hard to maintain infrastructure and the city crashes.

If you can't see that this sort of thing is headed towards the surveillance state of 1984 then you need to wake up.

There is a constant push towards more and more government and corporate surveillance.

> “It’s not going to be a smart city of surveillance. It’s going to be a smart city of privacy, and that will be a first.”

I don't believe this. I think this person should be personally tossed in jail when they inevitably are revealed to be collecting far more than people wanted them to.

> What does a tech company know about running a real live city?

Nothing, but they won't let that stop them. They will pack it with enough sensors to go full on dystopian nightmare and provide as little actual human support as possible.

> intelligent “pay-as-you-throw” garbage chutes

jesus, they really will find a way to ruin everything.

> neighbors would crowdsource approvals for block-party permits, giving a thumbs-up or thumbs-down based on the noise the gathering was expected to produce

oh great, we can have those shitty neighborhood social networks cranked up to 10.

oh and just imagine the HOAs!

> few better places to have this conversation than Canada, a Western democracy that takes seriously debates over informational privacy and data ownership—and is known for managing to stay polite while discussing even hot-button civic issues.

hopefully people wake up and become very very impolite towards these goddamn data companies.

> Hitching up with tech companies that are flush with both cash and grand visions might be cities’ best chance to leap into the future, or at least to turbocharge their lagging districts

Yeah, we need to give more power to corporations. Not less. We need fucking Larry running every aspect of our lives.

> So far, the deal hasn’t exactly been a victory for transparency

What a shock.

> You wouldn’t buy Nintendo and order them to make a console more powerful than the XBox One X. That’s not what they do.

Except Nintendo could do that and be fine. Probably not, but if the third party is strong.

This is more like telling them to start shoving out a mario game twice a year.

mostly cause the laws get abused to target mostly democrat voters.

because they can negotiate a better deal despite the illegal no poaching agreements.

> Variation in wealth can be a sign of variation in productivity

Yes, Jeff Bezos is 2 million times more productive than the average person.

Maybe we shouldn't listen to the guy worth, at least, hundreds of millions when it comes to wealth inequality.

> Robotaxis stand to challenge the economics of personal vehicle ownership

I have yet to hear a compelling reason why I would give up my car, and if I did why public transit isn't a better option.

> argues the problem is less about building a perfect driving system than training bystanders to anticipate self-driving behavior

Can we stop listening to him now?

I'm joking, he's an expert of course, but seriously that's a pretty dumb view. It's exactly the sort of thing I expect from a SV "disruptor" type.

> “Rather than building AI to solve the pogo stick problem, we should partner with the government to ask people to be lawful and considerate,” he said. “Safety isn’t just about the quality of the AI technology.”

Just crazy.

These people just really do not seem to care if they kill people. They are engaging in foolish behavior rushing ahead with a technology that's not ready and thinking they can just paper over the gaps with laws and patches.

> not just to think everything related to big-tech is solved by machine learning.

In fairness, I think most people realize that a significant number of problems are actually solved by blockchain instead.

Facebook correctly labels hateful sections of the declaration of independence as hateful.

not as catchy a title I guess.

Or humans have a natural affinity for smooth surfaces and curves. Objects that happen to be aerodynamically efficient.

> It would be pretty difficult to restrict lobbying without running into problems with the First Amendment.

Then fuck the first amendment. Change it.

This is very cool.

Makes me sad I'll never do anything like this.

Why? There aren't 2 sides to every issue. What possible justification are you imagining for charging a 13 year old with a felony for recording a conversation with his school principals?