You’re understanding of “gig work” is comically outdated. You sound naive or trollish. “Jobs for teens” like fast food work, grocery clerking, and working at movie theaters have always been taken by people who need “real jobs” and not just teens looking for extra money. So you’re wrong that these careers exclusively for kids to get pocket money ever existed, certainly not in living memory.

Secondly, OP isn’t talking about working the carwash for the summer. He’s talking about Uber and AirBNB. Maybe you heard of them? Over the last decade, they’ve caused massive disruption of the hotel and taxi industries by allowing thousands of unlicensed and unregulated “micro entrepreneurs” 🤮 to create a new economy of pay-per-task workers who end up owning all the physical assets (which rapidly deprecate in value) but none of the infrastructure or investments (which do not, or do so on much different schedules).

Houses being bought up for short term rentals has contributed to the housing crisis. Its caused economic harm to inner cities. It’s a looking part of the polycrisis destroying the practical economy and the planet’s livability. But yeah man, the real problem is lazy people just don’t want real adult jobs, give me a fucking break.

Rich people always threaten this and never do it, because it’s a John Galt problem. Rich people need poor people to trickle money to for services and goods. If they all move to “Rich Asshole Island” where there’s no laws or taxes, they quickly discover there’s also no workers.

Fuck all of them, I dare every millionaire to leave NYC. They almost certainly cannot. All their wealth is actually tied up in business and assets. In NYC. They could sell them, but to whom? All the rich are fleeing right? If the city or collectives of workers buy them, thats more socialism and proof the rich aren’t necessary.

So no, they won’t leave. They’ll whine and cry and then fund police and paramilitaries and lobbiest to try and force their view. They’ll spend millions propping up friendly candidates like Coumo and running smear campaigns.

In other words, they’ll do what they’ve historically always done when threatened.

I agree with the analysis of the east coast, and will add that the South (“Silicon Bayou” is such a sad joke) is in basically the same place.

But I don’t think the West coast actually has all those advantages either, not anymore. What passes for “innovation” is all some variation on crypto, ai, or “being the Uber of $NICHE.” Throw in some buzzwords like IoT, quantum, blockchain, or “smart” and you’re all set to race with the other founders to get a piece of that sweet sweet VC dollar.

The financiers have taken over everything and are going to drive the economy off a cliff so they can scavenge and sell the parts. They’ve taken over film, gaming, tech, all traditional media, journalism, and they’re using the banner of “privatization” to finish off healthcare, education, postal services, and anything else they can convince idiots to sell them. The bankers are winning.

SE/SO has been on the decline for a long time now. They pivoted to find more ways to monetize the answers and started enshittifying, trying to appeal to business clients and money-people instead of the users and developers who built the knowledgebase. It was good when it felt like a community helping each other, it fell off when it felt like a company milking you to build out their monetized wiki.

At this point, from their perspective, the biggest fuck up was not locking down SE from scrapers and building their own AI. It is in every way the same situation that Reddit is in, just with a more focused and higher quality data set (and fewer, arguably “higher quality,” users).

(As a lover of mixed-style and chaos in general, I picked what seemed like the “normiest” option for maximum impact, haha)

I’m kind of weirdly horny for Torvalds making unilateral decisions about long running controversies? Tell me what standards are best kernel daddy.

Maybe next he can ban tabs and ‘\t’ from Linux? Everyone indents with spaces now, debate over.

I don’t necessarily think the MM is intentionality going against AI, they’re just following what drives engagement and the mainstream tide is turning against AI (again, AI winter 3.0, here we go).

However, I did see that “AI causes delusions” article in the NYT together with the very hilarious conflict of interest notice: “The NYT is currently suing OpenAI for copyright infringement.”

So who knows? It is entirely in the MM’s interests to both write about AI (hot topic, much engagement) and also to make the AI companies look incompetent, reckless, and dangerous because that bolsters their cases against them.

Two things occurred to me reading this:

1. Huge numbers are exceedingly common, but counting particles is the wrong way to find them. Combinatorics is where the real monster hunting lies. When you start calculating complex probabilities or numbers of possible arrangements of things, that’s where the fuzzy boundary between “infinite” and “really, really, really finitely big” starts to blur.
2. I think looking to CompSci is the right move, but I still don’t see many folks discussing computational complexity as a real, mathematical limit. We often treat two equal statements as though theres an immediate, single-step, jump between them. But discovering the equality requires computation/calculation. Shannon shows that information and entropy are the same thing. Computation is the process by which information is created. Ultrafinitist need to show that there is a finite quantity of information, which I don’t think is true or possible.

Seems handy, but all the typical git caveats apply:

• “Here’s a cool feature! NEVER USE IT THIS WAY OR YOU’LL RUIN YOUR WORKING DIRECTORY!”
• Here’s a cool feature, it’s actually old and has no standard usage so everyone you meet will be subtly misusing it differently
• Here’s why you should use my workflow instead of yours: Demonstrates a process with 2 less steps but also he skips the cleanup steps so actually its the same amount of work

Fossil also supports this out of the box: you can have as many checkouts of a repo as you want against different branches, and it tries to prevent you from accidentally nesting repositories instead of opening new checkouts.

There are other privacy issues with having an indelible marker as to the origin and chain of custody of every digital artifact. And other non-privacy issues.

So the idea here is that my phone camera attaches a crypro token to the metadata of every photo it takes? (Or worse, embeds it into the image steganographically like printer dots.) Then if I send that photo to a friend in signal, that app attaches a token indicating the transfer? And so on?

If that’s a video of say, police murdering someone, maybe I don’t want a perfect trail pointing back to me just to prove I didnt deep fake it. And if that’s where we are, then every video of power being abused is going to “be fake” because no sane person would sacrifice their privacy, possibly their life, to “prove” a video isnt AI generated.

And those in power, the mainstream media say, aren’t going to demonstrate the crypto chain of custody on every video they show on the news. They’re going to show whatever they want, then say “its legit, trust us!” and most people will.

These are the fundamental issues with crypto that people actually don’t understand: too much of it is actually opt-in, it’s unclear to most people what’s actually proved or protected, and it doesn’t actually address or understsnd where trust, authority, and power actually come from.

It sounds like this guy was also relying on the AI to self-report status. Did any of this happen? Like is the replit AI really hooked up to a CLI, did it even make a DB to start with, was there anything useful in it, and did it actually delete it?

Or is this all just a long roleplaying session where this guy pretends to run a business and the AI pretends to do employee stuff for him?

Because 90% of this article is “I asked the AI and it said:” which is not a reliable source for information.

Fair cop, I didn’t check source I just saw it mentioned elsewhere. His company being valued at just over a billlion probably confused people.

I grant that there’s a difference of degrees here, but him being “just” an unethical millionaire doesn’t substantially change my views on the situation.

Someone in another thread mentioned polyamory which I find a personally interesting angle as well, since I practice relationship anarchy. This situation would just never happen to me because all my paramours know each other and know about the activies we do together. It makes me suspicious of these stories because while I also enjoy laughing at a rich guy getting caught, I don’t like that it culturally reinforces this idea of monogamy as a core value and that breaking the trust of such monogamy should have public consequences.

Obviously the last thing I want is society-wide condemnation of the wrong aspect of this situation. It isnt the having a side-piece that’s the problem, it’s the lying to your primary partner (and everyone else) that actually creates the trouble.

Their reaction is what set it all off too. Even the singer immediately speculates that they’re having an affair because of how they acted. So yeah, even if he wasn’t a billionaire, somebody probably would have doxxed him anyway because there are tons of people that like drama and know they can make money off it. That he is a billionaire and doing something deeply unethical is what makes the story go viral all over social media. Lots and lots of people there want to make money and clout by exploiting any avenue for drama and engagement.

Perhaps the problems this exposes are not just our grim and omnipresent surveillance apparatus, but the attached system of gig-economy content creators all racing to the lowest common denominator for scraps of engagement and ad revenue? We’ve created a society of unempathetic monsters.

For all the sudden word scholars here: there is no second word “master” that’s spelled, pronounced, and written exactly the same as the other one but is entirely unrelated to the concept of master\slave. All modern meanings of the word master derive from the same root: magister, meaning an authority or teacher.

A “master recording” is the authority, the base copy from which all others are duplicated. They aren’t called “slave” copies, although the primary use of the terms in computing did originally use those 2 words. Also as someone else pointed out, you don’t even really make copies of git branches in the same way as audio so the term is misapplied.

Main is also a bad name, unless you’re working on a solo project with only 1 main branch and some features. As soon as you start collaborating with other people, you should really have individual dev branches or “forks” (be honest, 90% of you aren’t rawdogging git straight from the CLI, there’s a forge website involved as hub) to work on, with an integration\testing “fork”\branch to combine work and a release branch for final code, with each discrete release tagged.

No gods, no kings, no masters!

No one commits to trunk anymore…

“Aid seekers” is a damn strange way to spell “starving children”

Nostalgia marketing operates on roughly 20 to 30 year cycles, so we’re dead center of 90s nostalgia. As the current decade wears on, there should be a gradual shift to 2000s era nostalgia (and another revival of the 80s, the most marketable decade). I can’t say that looming war in the middle east doesn’t give me those warm Bush 2 era vibes, though we are a bit early for it.

deleted by creator

This is a good idea, but also working remote frees up time to meet new affinity groups.

Not to dump on people’s relaxation strategies, but even the most introverted person can’t survive on video games and gooning alone.

If you don’t want or like hanging with coworkers, find a local bar to hang out at and meet some folks, go to a community board game night, join a choir, attend an anime viewing night, just do something to take initiative and meet some folks that like what you like.

Aside from the psychological/sociological side of it, PFAS and microolastics have been shown in some studies to reduce women’s fertility and to mess with sperm. So environmental damage is also poisoning us and destroying our ability to procreate. Go team!