the point is that people can still use the internet. u dont need cloudflare to use the internet they can be down forever and people will still have internet. they shut down access to services _on_ the internet.
it might feel like the internet is off depending on which services, but you can still find eachother and use internet if these services are down aslong as ISP networks and core routes/switches still work. if you have an IP,.and your friend has an IP and the network in between routes those,.that is the internet. If you host a website on that IP, that is a service _on_ the internet..
Every time there’s a football game? At least that I’m hearing in the case of Spain. No, they don’t throw a switch, but they turn off enough CDNs to effectively turn off the internet.
Again, no personal experience, but have heard enough from folks here to believe it.
Indeed; but for the author, the challenge was not to produce a good translation of anything, or to develop a good automated process for doing so. It was to bash together a website that churns out translations, without even a specified level of quality. For the author, these are all challenges of making a process to do something; not to produce any actual artifacts of quality.
> linked in the article (did you read it?), to daringfireball, to a CBS interview with the Anthropic CTO.
Funny that you yourself didn’t click the link to see that it was the Palantir CTO who said it, not Anthropic. The Anthropic part is made up by daringfireball.
> Sankar doesn’t name anyone, alas, but if there’s any truth to this (and good god do I hope there is) it’s got to be Anthropic researchers specifically.
And the CTO isn’t speaking for his company. His own source is “there’s so many interesting stories around this”.
So everyone is reading stuff online and adding another layer to the bullshit, just like you yourself did right now.
Did you follow the link? It's another article quoting an anecdote from a CBS interview. It's not an actual statistic from a reputable survey or anything. This is what OP was saying - it's a fuckin telephone game. Chinese whispers. The rumour mill.
All online discussions these days are like those chain email forwards of the last generation. <= this is the original point
This statement that AI researchers are taking up smoking was made by Alexander Karp (CEO of Palantir) <= this is is a wrong statement as per the link in the article I very much did read.
The original quote was from Shyam Sankar, CTO of Palantir, not Karp. <= this is someone that points out the statement is wrong, thereby proving the original point.
>Curious; Resourceful; Self-reliant (to feel they have agency in the world); Compassionate; Value personal integrity, themselves, their ideas / wishes, and time on the planet; Able to cooperate, communicate, and work as a team; Able to make sacrifices for the future versions of themselves ("I'm having a bad day today, what can I do to make tomorrow me have a better day?"); Able to enjoy life and find fulfillment (however small) even in bad times.
77 million Americans voted to give the higher office and nuclear codes to the complete opposite of that.
Before you roll your eyes and cuss about "someone inserting politics yet again in a topic": kids aren't dumb and have enough innocence to see when adults say something and do the opposite, and not be ok with it. And it is a big part of becoming a jaded, cynical adolescent and adult.
So if you want your kids to have these qualities, show them yourself. Or be very clear with them that you don't and explain why.
There haven't been any good options for president in a long time. Democracy is mostly an illusion. Nearly every politician has been corrupted and co-opted by corporations, the military industrial complex, deep state, and perverse special interests. Obama was a huge disappointment, infamously bailed out Wall St and arrested zero bankers over the GFC, ACA was a massive giveaway to the private health insurance corporations, expanded mass surveillance, presided over the persecution of whistle blowers, engaged in widespread drone bombing and regime change wars in the middle east...
Biden was a senile career politician. His administration pushed for confrontation with Russia over bringing Ukraine into NATO, and did nothing about Israel's genocide in Gaza. When it became obvious Biden was effectively brain dead, much like Mitch McConnell now, the DNC appointed Kamala without a primary -- another glaring example of their subversion of touted democratic principles. She was yet another empty suit, incapable of expressing original ideas, and would have done basically the exact same things as Trump like allowing Israel to expand theirs wars of choice in the middle east.
This is accurate but most people will not recognize it that way because it's designed that way.
Prior to 'democracy' the peasants revolted and that occasionally had some very nasty consequences for the ruling class. Now when the peasants have the urge to revolt - you just remind them them to do a better job at 'voting'.
Like they say in a democracy: Consent is manufactured.
>There haven't been any good options for president in a long time.
that does not justify voting for the worst candidate for this office in as many decades.
this argument immediately pops up. and it's easily refuted: just don't vote for the guy convicted of felonies and with a long history of boorish behavior and grift. it's really not that hard.
Just a big brain effort to wash their hands of any responsibility.
Democracy is not just voting and expecting things to fall your way. You have to convince. You have to organize. You have to nourish the civil society through sustained effort. You need to have reasonable expectations and make choices, not whine and wish you had you cake and eat it.
Of everything he mentioned, your TDS causes you to only care that he voted for the 'other' teams star player? Our country (the U.S.) is doomed and deserves it.
It's especially funny since he didn't even mention who he voted for. A mere hint of criticism of the preferred party triggered an attack mode right away.
Frankly, a lot of what he said wasn't that far off from reality, so I only responded to the thing which stood out the most. Nothing I said was an attack, and I'm really not sure how you could read it that way. It seems really clear that Trump has done things which Harris would never have done, like the frankly stupid trade wars, or the even stupider war in Iran. I doubt any other Republican candidate would have done those things either, they are uniquely Trump.
I have no love for the Democratic party, and you appear to be reading things that I never said.
You are quite right and I did jump the gun with my comment, my apologies.
To comment on Trump vs Kamala, Harris might not have done what Trump has done, but I suspect she would have done a lot of other things that Trump would not have done. I am not even sure about that stupid war - it depends on whether you believe that the President is more than a mere figurehead.
Completely delusional comment. If Harris - or Biden, or Obama - had done one tenth of what Trump is doing, there would be an insurrection from the Republicans.
Just imagine Biden boasting about taking dementia tests and changing the answer every time. Or Obama sending "his" DOJ to arrest a Republican lwmawmaker a few days before an election. Just take anything Trump - or his cabinet: just imagine Obama's secretaries and guests just fluffing him all the time, calling him the greatest and brightest non-stop - are doing and imagine for a second the violence of the outcry if any Democrat had done it.
You reach for "TDS" when Trump and his cronies can't stop talking about "Sleepy Joe" and "Barack HUSSEIN Obama". What the fuck, man. Trump is deranged, not us.
We are now discussing which President is worse, not which one is better. That's ironic.
There was a reason why Trump has won, and it is not because half of the country is stupid like people on this forum like to claim, but because they were sick of the status quo. But of course voters were duped, again.
There would not be any insurrection from the Republicans because both parties are one and the same. Marx was right about that. I don't think I'll bother dragging my ass to the polls anymore. My prediction - every president will be worse than the one before.
See? It is possible to answer without getting personal, calling the other guy delusional and using foul language. I can do that, and so can you.
>See? It is possible to answer without getting personal, calling the other guy delusional and using foul language. I can do that, and so can you.
Yeah, you just have to imply without proof that there is a massive conspiracy by all of "them".
>But of course voters were duped, again.
At what moment where they duped? Trump has been known for decades as a liar, crook, conman and narcissist. The truth is that people who voted for him are either idiots or complicit but thought he would screw the "others", not them. "Leopard eating faces party" and all that.
In the end you are the best argument as for why democracy doesn't work and you are worsening the problem: never taking responsibility (like Trump!). "We were duped". No. You made the wrong choice despite having all the relevant information at your fingertips and you are rightfully punished for that. If you aren't happy with what the two parties are offering, have you tried voting in their primaries? Have you canvassed for an alternative candidate? Oh, you are outgunned by big donors? Don't you know there are organisations and candidates who want to put caps on dark money and PACs? Have you done anything to support them?
You don't like what democracy has to offer? Well, democracy doesn't "offer" anything, you are supposed to be a member and actively participate. Democracy gives the power to the people. When did you think you would have power without also having the responsibility? Garbage in, Garbage out.
Thus Trump is the supreme "representative" of the American people. He represents your hate, your greed, your apathy, your grievances, your violence, your selfishness and so on. 77 million Americans were fine with that and made the effort to go to polling places and cast their vote for him.
You still don't believe me? I am more than forty years old. I perfectly remember how Americans were out for blood after 9/11 and how they viciously attacked anyone who didn't support the "war on terror" and the invasion of Iraq. "French surrendering monkeys" and so on. I am not talking about politicians but about most Americans outside of "liberal" cities. Fucking Art Spiegelman, one of the greatest comic artist , Holocaust survivor, being silenced for very mid criticism of the bellicism.
Now the same people wail about how it was all a lie, no more foreign wars, yada yada yada. Has there been any reckoning of how hate blinded you? Any reckoning the few left-wing Democrats who were against the war were right? Nope. "We were lied to". No, you loved the lie.
But...Yawn. Yes, it's quite sad that people have to turn to a crook with the hope of getting things changed because the other side hasn't delivered either.
You can save your "you" and "your" self-righteous rhetoric btw. I didn't vote for the current boss, and you won't be teaching me how to live either. A great example of political discussions being a waste of time. We are done here.
The self-righteousness is dripping from all your posts from the very beginning of this thread, dear Enlightened one who saw through the illusion of democracy.
And the US has the greatest economy in the world as a result. No losing millions to corrupt licensing and permitting schemes, council / tribunal approvals, certifications and mandatory examinations, etc.
As a Europoor it's sad seeing my young nephew growing up, and realising he will have far better opportunities in the US or China than here, where everything is blocked, taxed and regulated to maintain the status quo.
> realising he will have far better opportunities in the US or China than here, where everything is blocked, taxed and regulated to maintain the status quo.
Those two countries have far worse inequality than most countries in Europe. So yes, he might have better opportunities in US and China, but that's because he was born in Europe and will be in a better position to choose his future than if he had been born in a country where the inequality level meant he could not access the opportunities available in that country. You need to think about why those countries have better opportunities in the first place. They paid a price for that.
> Those two countries have far worse inequality than most countries in Europe
There is inequality because they have more super rich people, whereas in Europe there is less inequality but everyone is poorer. This is why inequality is a pointless argument.
> There is inequality because they have more super rich people
Not quite, they also have more poor people to a scale that doesn't exist in many countries in Europe.
A consequence of having more poor people: strain on the healthcare and justice systems (relatively more acutely ill people, relatively more people committing crime) and bad educational outcomes (poor people tend to score lower).
A consequence of having more rich people: democratic processes are regularly under pressure due to the influence of rich people trying to make more favourable processes. Government institutions getting swayed by money from these rich people in exchange for preferable treatment.
I am not sure where you got this dichotomy, but the appropriation process in the USA certainly has its own corruption issues, strong industrial lobbies are IMO a form of legal corruption (including campaign donations), and the current administration is in a class of its own wrt corruption and wasteful spending.
The USA certainly have the "best" (according to some metrics) economy in the world, but the reasons are complex, diverse, and mainly historical.
I will concede that some areas see fewer regulations, leading to a leaner permitting process (though it has consequences on road safety, environment pollution and gun safety, for instance).
However, it is hard to predict the future, and I am unsure if your last point will stand the test of time. For instance, if/when the AI bubble pop, the USA job market will probably suffer more than others. It is tempting to always see greener grass elsewhere, but Europe isn't in such a bad position compared to the USA.
Democracy isn't two wolves and a sheep voting about what's for dinner.
Just ask yourself if you would be ok with the majority of the population voting to abolish private property. Or Islamists voting to end votes. Or men voting to remove the voting rights of women.
>a lot of people were pro trump based on 2016-2020 which was a very different trump compared to today
Ah, yes, the Trump who tried to overturn the 2020 election and keeps saying non-stop since then that the election was rigged. A much more presidential person.
It seems perfectly pertinent to show the wide gap between the game's message and the developer's message.
So weird that you want journalists to "shut up and play ball" while the developer doesn't have to. If anything, it is Blow and Trump who are finding and attacking political enemies everywhere, all the time. You are fine with culture wars, but only when they come from one side - the other side is dirty and terrible to have the galls to do the same.
No, Blow "plays ball" in the things he produces: his games aren't political as far as I know. But the journalist does not play ball: He includes political jabs when reviewing games without political jabs.
(For both parties it is legitimate to throw political punches in other contexts, like on social media.)
I don't know that we can entirely avoid discussing politics in the context of a game where even his publisher felt the need to publicly disavow his political views.
It's also a game that incorporates work from a wide variety of other creators, several of whom made well-publicised statements that they would not have agreed to be a part of this had Blow's current political views been common knowledge at the time.
> I don't know that we can entirely avoid discussing politics in the context of a game where even his publisher felt the need to publicly disavow his political views.
Of course we can! If some far-left activist makes a puzzle game without activism in it, we should do the same and judge the game on its own terms, without need for political discussion or publisher statements.
> It's also a game that incorporates work from a wide variety of other creators, several of whom made well-publicised statements that they would not have agreed to be a part of this had Blow's current political views been common knowledge at the time.
This is like the collaborators of our hypothetical far-left puzzle creator disavowing him for being woke. That's obviously just as bad. If the work (the game in this case) has no political content, the political convictions of the collaborators don't matter.
> If some far-left activist makes a puzzle game without activism in it
If a far-left activist made an overly non-political game incorporating the work of other leftists, they would catch flak from their own compatriots over betraying their principals for money.
Look, "separating the art from the artist" is all very well, but we can't do that without acknowledging the political views of the artist(s) (especially when the artists are publicly beefing over said views)
> If a far-left activist made an overly non-political game incorporating the work of other leftists, they would catch flak from their own compatriots over betraying their principals for money.
I don't think that's true. It doesn't make any sense. Leftists would obviously be perfectly okay with collaborating with other leftists on whatever.
The point was that people on both the left and right should be okay with collaborating with people of the opposite end of the political spectrum when it comes to apolitical projects.
Imagine you were only allowed (or willing) to contribute to the Linux kernel if your personal unrelated political views align with those of Linus Torvalds. That would obviously be crazy.
> Look, "separating the art from the artist" is all very well, but we can't do that without acknowledging the political views of the artist(s)
Absolutely we can! We don't go around referencing the political opinions of our car mechanic or hair dresser, because these don't matter for the quality of their jobs. Exactly the same holds for game designers who make unpolitical games.
> The point was that people on both the left and right should be okay with collaborating with people of the opposite end of the political spectrum when it comes to apolitical projects
> We don't go around referencing the political opinions of our car mechanic or hair dresser, because these don't matter for the quality of their jobs
The hair dresser example is the worst example you could have thought of, given the importance of hairdressing for the African-American population. Or just see how parents and very serious people freaked out when teenagers started keeping long hair during the 60s-70s.
Hairdressing is extremely political.
As for the car mechanic example, I wouldn't be black and have my car "repaired" by a racist who would overcharge me out of spite and could sabotage my brake lines. Or just talk with women about their experience with car mechanics and see how much their political opinions on women don't matter.
Again, you can afford not to engage with politics at the hair salon or the garage only because you belong to the dominant group.
Start talking to people who aren't like you and you will discover a lot of things you never see in your life. That's what it means to be "woke": it is to awaken to the experience of people who are looked down upon.
It's not. You don't have to evaluate their political opinion to evaluate the quality of the hairstyles. You can just look at their work. Whether the hairdresser is on the left or right, he/she can't and won't force a hairstyle on you which you don't want.
> As for the car mechanic example, I wouldn't be black and have my car "repaired" by a racist who would overcharge me out of spite and could sabotage my brake lines.
This is ridiculous. You could equally have chosen an example of you as an old white man, with a woke car mechanic who overcharges you and sabotages your brake lines out of spite. But you didn't. Because that would be just as absurd. But you only see your political enemy, right-wing people, as evil, not left-wing people, your political allies. That this is extreme political bias I need not point out.
>You could equally have chosen an example of you as an old white man, with a woke car mechanic who overcharges you and sabotages your brake lines out of spite. But you didn't.
Because it is ridiculous. It is a completely absurd premise born in a mind that tries to "both sides" things that are not the same. "Woke" is not reverse racism.
reply