

This is almost a textbook example of the broken window fallacy.
I have two chimps within, Laziness and Hyperactivity. They smoke cigs, drink yerba, fling shit at each other, and devour the face of anyone who gets close to either.
They also devour my dreams.


This is almost a textbook example of the broken window fallacy.


“Microsoft”, who? Certainly not Suleyman, Davuluri, or Nadella.


Even if you’re in the camp that understands memes like “6 7” have more significance than they’re given credit for,
I think 6-7 is a shibboleth. It doesn’t say much on its own, except which group you belong to.
Substance, as ever, remains a relative notion. Nyan Cat perhaps didn’t have the substance of an Andy Warhol image
I’d argue the Nyan cat is more substantial than what Andy Warhol came up with.
If you want a great reset you’ll need a new internet that is outright hostile to corporate interests. No corposlop being produced there, no derailing old memes to sell you junk.


Nah, quoting Stormfront is not a bug. Quoting well-sourced facts retrieved from Wikipedia is.


I’m mindblown at him being mindblown.
Oh wait, I’m not. Because I know those CEOs are completely detached from reality, and take users for dumb cattle ready to be herded.
Funny but insightful comment from the link:
“Never get high on your own stuff. A lesson this guy doesn’t seem to have learned…”
Fediverse, please enlighten me - is Windows a drug? …on a more serious note, “don’t overestimate the desirability of what you’re trying to sell” is sensible advice.
They’re best used alongside a hopper filter system. Just to handle unstackables.
Build an auto-sorter, so you can put it in a chest full of random junk, and it’ll output it into labelled chests.


Lemmy has Reddit. PieFed has Lemmy.
Also, from 4chan’s PoV, Reddit is more like a boogerman than a boogeyman: it’s that weirdo creepo that makes you say “eew”, avoid at all costs, and if you touch them by accident or social pressures (“why no handshake?”), you immediately wash your hands.
Instead the actual boogeymen are internal: for /g/ it’s /a/, for /b/ and /int/ it’s /pol/, and for almost everyone else it’s /b/.
Ah, the struggles of the prolabubutariat…


Yeah, the terminology is currently a mess. Not just due to language changes, but also synchronic variation - different people using the same words for different meanings, at the same time. But for me, it’s a mix of motivations, methods, and morality:


It’s more than that: they’d need to have desires, aversions, goals. That is not automatically granted by intelligence; in our case it’s from our instincts as animals. So perhaps you’d need to actually evolve Darwin style the AGI systems you develop, and that would be way more massive than a single AGI, let alone the “put glue on pizza lol” systems we’re frying the planet for.


My guess:
Coverage roughly follows money, and that money comes the top of the hierarchy. However, the top is too far from the production to actually get that 1) automation is nothing new, and 2) AI won’t help as much with it as advertised.
The middle of the hierarchy is close enough to the production to know those two things, but it’ll parrot them because doing so enables the inefficiency they love so much, under the disguise of efficiency.
Then you got the bottom. It’s the closest to the production, but often suffers from a problem of “I don’t see the forest, I see the leaves”, plus since it has no decision power so it ends as a “meh who cares”. So it’ll parrot whatever it sees in the coverage.
As such, who’s actually going to get screwed here? The answer may surprise you.
All three. However not in the way people predict, “AI is going to steal our jobs”. It’s more like suckers at the top will lose big money on AI fluff, and to cut costs off they’ll fire a lot of people.
Setting aside “and how will it do that?” as outside the scope of the topic at hand, it’s a bit baffling to me how a nebulous concept prone to outright errors is an existential threat. (To be clear, I think the energy and water impacts are.)
Ditto.


Interestingly enough, not even making them actually intelligent would be enough to make them liable - because you can’t punish or reward them.


No problem - miscommunication happens.


Yes, this should be illegal, but it’s already common practice. I’m just hoping that enough of this will eventually get people to stop buying these products, and hopefully we can start seeing some real legislation against it in some countries.
Problem is, people won’t stop buying them. Often “smart” products are sold comparatively cheaper, because the business expects additional profits through ads; and if Samsung is going this way (ads on your fridge), it’ll do it.
The “crackers” part of this confuses me. Samsung is a Korean company. The chairman’s name is Lee Jae-yong (이재용). Samsung NA’s CEO is Yoonie Joung. Maybe I’m misreading this?
By “crackers” I mean “black hat hackers”. The sort of people who’d love to drop some ransomware into your fridge and then say “if you don’t want me to brick your fridge, pay me a few bucks”.
(After some websearch, apparently Americans use it as a derogatory term. I wasn’t aware of that.)


However, Samsung is giving users the option to turn off ads.
For now, like the author herself mentions later on (“The bigger issue is that of trust. […] that’s today.”)
[Higby] “This pilot further explores how a connected appliance can deliver genuinely useful, contextual information. The refrigerator is already a daily hub, and we’re testing a responsible, user-controlled way to make that space more helpful.”
What Shane Higby is saying here boils down to “we’re trying to help the user”. But if he said so, in clear words, every bloody body would call it bullshit, because it’s common knowledge companies smear ads on your face for their own sake - not yours. But if you hide it behind fancy words, like “further explores” and “deliver” and the likes, it’s harder to call the bullshit.
I’m getting real tired of this shit.
[Higby] "…future promotions will depend on the feedback and insights gained from the program.”
Translation: “we’re just testing the waters now. Let’s see if the suckers swallow it or spit it.”
This is similar to the justification Panos Panay, Amazon’s […] He said it was looking to be “elegantly elevating the information that a customer needs.”
Emphasis mine. You can always trust Amazon in one thing: belittling the user.
The problem here isn’t just the ads themselves (although they are a problem); it’s that they are being added to the device after it’s in my home.
[Warning, IANAL.] Fight this shit. Seriously, fight it. On legal grounds. What they’re doing should be outright illegal in most countries; it’s equivalent to changing a contract unilaterally after both parties signed it.
Additionally, I’d strongly advise against buying any sort of “smart” device, unless you’re pretty sure the benefits of connecting your toaster to the internet outweighs all the risks. Including corporations and crackers taking control of it, harvesting your data, spamming you, building kill switches into it, etc.


It’s possibly sarcasm, but I wouldn’t count on that given it’s HN.


Apparently I’m a human raised among the smurfs, but still unable to use their language.
It gets worse. They often start saying something, drop it before the critical part, then talk about something else. “I need you to buy something for me, can you… ah, I need to clean the cat’s litterbox.” style. To the point I’m often saying “finish the sentence”.
But wait, there’s more! One of them is most likely autistic. And she still does those family things all the time, but now with messier and over-detailed explanations. Full of “things thinging things”.


Side thought/my own ramblings here: Has there ever been hosting where the information is scattered across the world rather than one localized spot? That seems like it might be helpful, but I honestly don’t know enough about site hosting
In a certain sense we are using a system like this, due to federation. I don’t think the exact same model would work well for Wikipedia, but it could try something similar.
It includes my cat, when she seizes control of her cardboard house and polices it so the other cat stays away. She’s a cute bastard, but still a bastard!
Oh wait she’s always a bastard, even when not being a cop. Because she can’t stop being a cat. So I guess it’s more “ACAB” for “all cats are bastards” in her case.