I agree it's good we have archives of all the sensible takes on deporting criminals with due process and not mass rounding up people based on skin color or last name at a very high expense to the taxpayers with poor results.
I think this is one of those times where two people agree on the evidence but not the resulting position.
It's very easy to fight straw men like all progressives are against all deportation and border enforcement.
On the contrary with cheap LLMs this practice will be more prevalent. If you lift the cost barrier the McKinseys will be attaching all sorts of AI to everything.
All the AI bust means is that for engineers working at companies that invested too far into AI they're going to be looking for jobs. ML departments will be culled too. Just like the dot-com bust.
The list goes on. There's 24 years of history you can comb through. The DHS' security theater exists solely to compromise the constitutional rights of American citizens. To this day there's no evidence they're even that successful at their job. The fact the impeachment of Mayorkas failed was quite mind-boggling but characteristic of a government that doesn't truly believe anyone, even citizens, have certain inalienable rights.
The DHS was and still is bipartisan. It's America's Staatspolizei.
You know that things you posted about border and airport searches are absolutely not gonna go away with this move. Under this gov ingress control can only intensify, DHS or not.
What did stop is some pretty important recent cyber attack reviews and that seems to touch China's interests.
People are gonna stay upset for quite a while. The billion dollar election manipulation campaign spanning Reddit/Tiktok/Youtube/Television was extremely effective. It convinced a very, very specific kind of person that the by-the-numbers worst candidate in modern history was going to win in an absolute landslide.
It will be years before these people realize how much the media was controlled from 2020-2024 specifically in favor of one political party. For a lot of people this was the first time it was extremely obvious and going back to Bush and Obama social media and the internet in general weren't considered "serious" political campaign locations. I certainly dont remember either Bush's or Obama's election being so insanely partisan to the point of calling one party Nazis. Of course there was vitriol but it was so tame compared to today.
>being so insanely partisan to the point of calling one party Nazis
Do you mean the party who just used the inauguration to have a senior government member throw nazi salutes? The party whose presidents first actions included pardoning dozens of members of fascist groups?
You can't really be choosing this moment to complain about calling these people nazis??
I was about to say Musk doesn't have an actual role in government but I guess an executive order has made DOGE real, by renaming US Digital Service the US Doge Service.
I think you need to make the argument about Nazis on its merits. Trump's people do much that fits the definition of fascism, many try to normalize or advocate for fascism, dictatorship, and even normalize Hitler. His most prominent member of government did a proto-Nazi salute (and don't say he's too dumb to know what it would look like).
And that paragraph would not be objectionable to many people in that political grouping.
We truly do live a post-scarcity land of milk-and-honey when we can spend time bikeshedding over whether "cargo cult" is offensive or not.
Like most of the insane (oops thats a bad word too now) language policing its mostly done by yuppies who feel some sort of non-existent transitive oppression for people they have no connection with, had no connection with, and read some history blurb and decided to create a masterpiece of verbal diarrhea on the internet. Of which this blogpost is no exception.
It's yet another example of the virtue olympics and a great sign we have been without war, famine, economic collapse, or food crisis for far too long. We have no real struggles so instead we focus on policing language.
I'll keep using master/slave/male/female/blacklist/cargo cult/insane, thanks. There's a reason progressivism is no longer cool.
> And no, I'm not missing the joke. I first was online in 1998. I saw this stuff in games and forums. It wasn't funny then either.
Do you know what also wasn't funny? The invasion of people wanting to make everything about them. No one gave a fuck about who you were until you made it about who you were. That was the point. If you're willing to reduce yourself to being X you will be mocked for being X. It was a great way to insure people stayed behind their usernames and it worked well until the "normies" showed up. I seriously doubt your actual claimed history on the internet.
> It's also not narcissistic to talk about things that are important to you or your characteristics.
It is when you weren't asked, were never going to be asked, and attempted to use your characteristics to gain undeserved attention. "Tits or gtfo" was simply one iteration of several that mocked people for using any number of other characteristics to get undeserved respect. I remember several memes especially around gymbros and veterans that also were used to mock people into staying anonymous. Trolling these people was the immune system of forums, IRC, and games and it worked wonderfully.
> It can provide context and it can help people understand and make connections
This statement alone makes me doubt you ever actually spent time on the old internet. In 1998 I never had problems making solid connections, some still existing today, without knowing what particular physical characteristics my friend had. In some sense it's the purest form of connection - one that was never swayed by what normally might turn you away or towards someone.
If you imagine therapy as a way to condition some sort of gradient descent on emotions and awareness you can already see the problem.
The implication of your statement is you eventually reach some global optima. The reality is you become over-aware of some things and under-aware of others. This is the local optima and you've been caught in a bowl. Therapy "works" when your local optima is "good enough" for your own definition of done. However, it can often take several "bumps" out of those local optima to find it and once again you haven't really "optimized" like you are implying.
I would think the focus on optimization of emotional and awareness skills would simply lead to more, not less, anxiety. It sounds like the same problem people have with always being online and being a good "global citizen". In this example, like your example, when you feed your learning algorithm data about some war in a far off land you necessarily reduce the weight on your immediate surroundings.
Therefore, I believe it's impossible to "optimize" such things without making significant learning losses. Better to succumb to the brownian motion of life - imo.
The pangolin soup theory of COVIDs origin was touted by fact checkers as true. This was despite real concern from actual scientists.
Fact checkers fall into three possibly overlapping categories:
1. Government censorship units designed explicitly to convey what the government says as ultimate truth
2. Activist organizations using fact checking to control a narrative
3. Useful idiots who cite news or highly contentious sources (Wikipedia) as a source of truth
All 3 of these represent a version of “truth” conditioned on what sounds good or controls a narrative. “Common knowledge” is not always fact, too. In many cases fact checkers would be nice to have the truth is unknowable (think classified data). In no case are fact checkers unambiguously correct as they are often portrayed. Unfortunately, however, they are often given the unassailable position as truth-bearers. The “facts” (read “narrative”) changes so quickly on topics where a true oracle of truth would be indispensable the purpose of a fact checker is, factually, worthless.
This link isn't specific to the pangolin theory, but it's a readable review of a very competent debate about COVID origins, so I'd recommend it (and the debate it reviews) for those curious about the state of the arguments (as of early 2024): https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/practically-a-book-review-r...
On the contrary it's relatively simple to understand how it got there trivially.
Most modern cars, especially ones that fit into more "luxury" brands have an app. That app gives you telemetry and location data for a price. It's rather convenient to be able to pre-condition your car, or figure out where you parked in a massive unlabeled parking lot, etc. This is all consented to, but regardless the data is tracked anyway via some GPS/cell system modern cars have. When you pay for it you get more stuff - anti-theft, better tracking, service tracking, etc.
It's a convenience. I'm not entirely comfortable with it but if you want a better-than-decent car made after 2016 you probably have it on-board and unless you rip the ECM out you're stuck with it. Personally, I'd rather pay BMW, for example, for anti-theft and tracking than pay OnStar or another service that is gonna stick me with a ridiculous contract and stuff my car with even more buttons.
Eh, "consented to" is rather weak when you are forced to hit the "I agree" button to be able to drive the car you bought. That and forced arbitration need to die posthaste.
Back in the day, during the original Browser Wars, when the US Department Of Justice was trying to force Microsoft to detach Internet Explorer from Windows, Microsoft argued that it was impossible for Windows to operate without IE baked in. Well, it took a couple of "hackers" about a day to prove them wrong. I ran Windows XP without IE for years just fine. So yeah, cars can run without the app.
The data is collected even if you don't use the app or hit agree. The manufacturer has your personal info attached to the car from the warranty info. They're required to collect it so they can send you recall notices.
It's trivial to put a car in limp mode if the vehicle computers don't detect all the modules the manufacturer put there. It's slightly less trivial to detect missing antennas, but that tends to disable other features people enjoy like directions and data. Manufacturers simply don't care to cat-and-mouse this right now.
You're being deliberately obtuse and that kind of contrarianism is 100% correlated with douchebaggery IMPE. Be better.
Unless you somehow aren't kidding, in which I'll clarify: I'm skeptical that a modern electric vehicle that goes to the trouble of being a computer on wheels can work without an app. And I'll even clarify "can" - the car manufacturer allows you to operate the car without using its app.
Context changed the use of language. If you know any foreign languages you know two words that are more or less the same carry a different meaning in context.
Thankfully we have archives and youtube, entirely searchable, where from 2008-2012 the democrats were strongly for sending people back home.
reply