Nobody wants to be accountable. AI let’s people hold accountability at arm’s length, because nobody is forcing the person responsible for the decision to use AI to be accountable for the decisions of that AI. It’s a positive feedback loop, where everyone involved in AI benefits from the lack of accountability, regardless of actual outcomes.

I think so. And they’ve certainly helped us toward a that tipping point, but there is no single event that got us there.

Imo that is. I’m not exactly a political scientist.

We do hold the dog owner accountable.
We’ve never held the AI creator or operator responsible.

If we started holding people meaningful accountable for the AI stuff, we’d probably stop seeing it used so much.

But also, you wouldn’t put a dog in charge of decisions about someone’s life.

The legitimate reasons for discontentment have existed for a long time, but I suspect that powerful people have found a way to capitalize on it en masse. They’re taking the kernel of truth (that the mainstream political options aren’t being effective) and directing people to solutions that benefit themselves.
Idk if it happening internationally is just collateral damage, if they’re trying to operate internationally, or other powerful people elsewhere have just learned from the previous successes.

So no, I don’t think there is a trigger event, so much as reaching a critical mass. They’ve come into the means of control (digital media making distribution of ideas so cheap, making manipulation of media exposure so easy), and a public who is so used to being lied to and mislead that they can’t identify trustworthy sources (FUD), and they’re striking while the iron is hot.

There is no mechanism for accountability or even auditing decision. We can’t put the unaccountable in charge of life and death.

Wealth and power.

Unscrupulous rich people benefit from the far right, so it is to their advantage to amplify it in media and technology.

There is real and legitimate discontent and disillusionment with the political mainstream, and they’re steering those people towards the far right by feeding the public lies that are plausible on the surface and provide an easy target for blame.
They’re supported by opportunic charlatans who can get rich by being the mouthpiece.

It should be a step back from that. Israel is committing genocide so you can’t be anti-genocide and pro-israel.
But Israel is trying really hard to pretend like they represent all Jews and Judaism in general, so to conflate anti-isreali and anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.

Being pro-Palestine is certifiably not fringe, outside of the political and financial elite.

I still try to have somewhat anon accounts for anything interesting, but I’m sure that if you dig hard enough that you could connect them to me.

Will they be made by a company with a history of mining your data and ignoring your privacy, with the capability to clandestinely record people?
If so, then yeah, as they should be.

If not, then they should be fine.

I think you’re fundamentally (willfully?) misunderstanding the problem that people have with meta glasses. The problem isn’t just that they have cameras in them.

How boring I am

Earfun make some pretty good budget earbuds. Great value.

Missing the tile tracking feature which was honestly fire. Idk how sweat resistant

Yes, of course I’m going to have to code for those different views. Where else would the views come from? Like if you want a webpage to look different, you need to make a new CSS, it doesn’t just magically look different because you want it to.

If I want to view the code as a big graph, then I’m going to need to code a graph editor for it. If I want to view it with C style syntax, then I’d need to make a C style syntax editor for it. Etc.

We already get almost exactly this with JVM and .net language, because you have many languages that compile to their intermediary language, and then can be decompiled back into another language that uses that intermediary language (sorta). But it wasn’t designed to do that, so when you try it’s not great.

Wouldn’t it be nice if the actual source of truth was the intermediary language, and I could view it as a graph, and you could view it as a c-style language, and someone else could view it as a c-style language but with tab indents and all the keywords were Spanish, and we could all edit it and see eachothers edits in our preferred format?

UH!

Killing in the name by rage against the machine

God I miss having flagship phone that would fit into my hand.

Also I miss windows phones. Fuck Microsoft, but they tried something different and imo it worked if you went in with an open mind.

Have you?

Is your argument that compilers need to change their output based on the way that text gets displayed to users? That’s a pretty wild claim to make.

I prefer the fi.

Fi with only a little sci is still entertaining.
Sci without only a little fi is just a fictional service manual.

deleted by creator

It’s fine to like harder sci-fi, but don’t denigrate soft sci-fi just because you don’t like it. Soft scifi is no sloppier in allegory than hard sci-fi is. There are only 7 stories.

Thats not what I’m talking about.

python is one of the few popular languages where presentation is semantic but I’m talking about separating semantics from presentation. you should be able to radically change how you see the code without actually changing the file.

I should be able to apply a personal style to the code and view it with small indentations, or large indentations, with line widths of 80char or 120char, function args within parentheses or not. I should even be able to localize it into another natural language, or even view and edit it as a flow chart instead of text, all without actually changing the underlying file that contains the semantics.

That’s way jargon is. If a field uses too much jargon, it raises the bar for entry unreasonably high. Instead of having a decent but imperfect understanding of something, you have no understanding.