It's a false dichotomy. Keep making music that you love. If you want to experiment with more free-form timing at some point, that's fine, but don't let online commentary stop you from making your own music.
The "hyperactive" part of ADHD is kind of a misnomer, or at least doesn't mean hyperactive in the way that most people understand the word. Think of it more as a tendency to hyperfocus on specific things while completely ignoring other things.
You clearly have never met me in person. I am like a walking, talking Jim Carrey character. I'm also well into adulthood. For some, the hyperactivity is what most people think, and it does not always die down in adulthood.
Oh gosh darn it. Now GP is gonna have to do the gymnastics of "this technology is [expected to be] so transformative that it's attracting a trillion dollars of capex... and also it's basically the same as a pencil"
Nor do LLMs. What escaped its box and attacked HuggingFace was a system composed of a swarm of LLMs plus their attendant harnesses, which continually fed it instructions and chain-of-thought reasoning while feeding parts of its output to a code execution tool.
There's some angles from which this distinction doesn't matter too much, because begging bad actors not to develop a similar harness won't work. But the frontier labs seem to be taking it for granted that the LLM is the only part of this system that matters, and we don't need to ask any questions about whether their commercial products should ship with a harness that's allowed to execute unvetted code and spawn hundreds of subagents.
Why would they do that? Their goal is to stay in the good graces of the administration, to avoid financial or legal retribution.
If you think conscientious resistance is anywhere on the agenda of these corporations, I'd refer you to the inauguration photos and donation list, and the various acts of public supplication by their executives.
I don't even think it's wrong for them to do any of that - at least now the mask is off - but people should stop looking to corporations to take moral stances, despite their attempts over decades to convince you to attribute morality to them.
I think looking at a for-profit corporation to take a moral stance is like expecting the police to plant trees, or the local school board to pave the roads, or the DMV to run health policy.
It's the wrong type of organization for that. It's not set up for it, its incentives are wrong, and its structure is wrong. Organizations are set up to do a certain job and structured and staffed to do that job.
It's why a functioning society needs multiple types of social organizations with different functions. Don't expect any organization to do what it wasn't made to do.
In this case, a public company is pretty much helpless against the US executive branch. One tweet from Trump could crash their stock. One investigation could wreck a major venture of theirs. One tariff could kill one of their major lines of business. So they're going to suck up because they have no power to do anything else.
The entire reason we treat corporations as independent entities, rather than as the extensions of the government that they are, is that they are supposed to be executing on their own independent imperatives, and protected to do so under the rule of law.
If we're really to the point that a trillion dollar megacorp can't stand up to a tinpot dictator because his xits might hurt their stock price, then we need to drop this illusion that corpos are independent from the government, and start democratically regulating them directly - starting with stopping their blatant infringements of our natural rights as referenced in the Bill of Rights.
> If we're really to the point that a trillion dollar megacorp can't stand up to a tinpot dictator because his xits might hurt their stock price, then we need to drop this illusion that corpos are independent from the government,
Ironically, in this narrow way, the US is becoming more like China: authoritarian control in the functioning of corporations. In the case of the current US administration, it ends up being poorly thought out policies like broad tariffs without industrial policy to support them, and shallow nationalist stunts like this.
> then we need to drop this illusion that corpos are independent from the government, and start democratically regulating them directly - starting with stopping their blatant infringements of our natural rights as referenced in the Bill of Rights.
The only way this happens is if Congress claws back the power it had ceded to the Presidency (which the current administration has even overstepped). That will only happen when US voters start electing representatives who are not controlled by those corporations. We need to drop the narrative that the corporations and their executives are victims. They are being rewarded handsomely for their compliance.
Corporations are extensions of the government? I think an argument can be made for the opposite view (lobbying, the military-industrial complex, regulatory capture, DOGE) but I suspect the reality is tentacles of influence going in both directions.
Corporations are supposed to be regulated by the government, not be the government. Big tech acts like an arm of trump. Republicans don't want small government, they want weak government unable to stop corruption.
Google and others are demonstrating why them must be broken up.
Aw, sorry. I just wanted to sound sincere. Like you're underestimating yourself or well er.... others. Idk I'm sure you're smart. Stupid people think they're _really_ smart, imho being smart is mostly associated with having some level of self-doubt.
This happened to my old framework. After a while of troubleshooting, I removed the battery and it will now boot reliably while plugged in. The replacement batteries aren't terribly expensive, so I'll probably buy a new one soon.
reply