Salta al contenuto principale




Do Any of You Guys Have Ideas for an Open Source Political Party?


I have been brainstorming an Open Source Political Party. Its probably the only way the entire earth isnt going to be ruined by corporations and dumb people.

Some ideas,

A digital voting framework, no rich canidates allowed.

Transparent online interviews, instead of debates, have a topic of the week.

A summery of peoples positions before the election.

--Some first policies--

Get rid of most laws and taxes, have a simple flat tax on everyone that is the same.

Replace our currency with a metal based currency with no fixed value by law.

Trans rights and Expanding the Constitution to limit the types of laws other politicians can pass if they are antihuman, antiliberty.

Reimaging some systems like healthcare and education for the 21st century and beyond.

Informing juries of their right to nullify the legal process

Forcing transparency in the state, passing privacy laws and protections.

Scientific funding for some ideas, like helping trans people to get better treatment and also have children. Taking half of tax revenues and giving it back to people in UBI. Creating a defensive military instead of an imperial one. Giving children more rights. Expanding schools into bording schools where students have a right to pick their school and live there if they want to escape abusive parents.

Bottom up governments, top down civil rights enforcment and dispute settling and managing of resources.

Getting rid of property tax for most people, only taxing property when someone or an entity owns multiple properties. No spamming to het around the tax.

Creating an opensource free internet infastructure and a free digital low bandwidth per user national digital radio network.

Right to repair and hack your devices. Full ownership of most devices. People cannot sell you partial ownership and puppet you through restrictive contracts, but still have protrctions for intellectual property. All devices must have open bootloaders or unlockable bootloaders. People cannot monopolize things like the radio chips and stuff to keep out competition and control the telecomunications infastructure by forcing people to only use apple and android devices which are full of spyware and adware and dont have root access to the hardware.

What do you guys think? Any ideas? Anyone want to maybe meet once a week on discord to start planing out the platform?

Questa voce è stata modificata (2 settimane fa)

Technology reshared this.



Consigli per un DynDNS provider EU o magari italiano (e comunque non criminale)?


Sto iniziando a giocare con un vecchio laptop sciacallato dal lavoro su cui ho installato ubuntu server, con Nextcloud e Docker.

Con Docker Compose ho installato Nginx e adesso vorrei provare a fare la cosa del DDNS su un dominio che ho registrato presso un provider italiano.

Ho guardato a un po' di provider e mi sembrano essere tutti americani o comunque su infrastruttura americana (DuckDNS su AWS, etc)

C'è qualcuno che mi consigliate nostrano o comunque EU e che abbia in generale una buona reputazione?

reshared this



in reply to IsaamoonKHGDT_6143

OK, I'll need some explanation because I don't fully understand what is being explained in the article.
in reply to Daerun

Microsoft made some database software called DocumentDB (which utilizes a kind of database system called NoSQL) that the Linux Foundation is now accepting into their list of projects they support. This was done because, unlike others like MongoDB, this one called DocumentDB was released under a license that people can use without certain restrictions that MongoDB put inside their license.

The core issue is that big tech companies regularly take software developed by open source devs and then use it for their big money machines without giving anything back to the original developers. MongoDB was fed up with this and started using a license that forces companies to publicize the code of the projects they use MongoDB for. Big Tech doesnt like that, because they really like money and not sharing how they make that money.

"Today, the market has spoken," Farkas wrote on Tuesday. "The Linux Foundation has announced the adoption of the DocumentDB project to create an open standard with MongoDB compatibility, the exact thing we were sued for earlier this year."


So now they have a software suite that people can use to replace their MongoDB systems.

Questa voce è stata modificata (2 settimane fa)
in reply to unexposedhazard

But MongoDB had an AGPL license. Why did they decide to change to a more restrictive one?
in reply to MCasq_qsaCJ_234

According to the company: mongodb.com/company/newsroom/p…

Unfortunately, once an open source project becomes interesting, it is too easy for cloud vendors who have not developed the software to capture all of the value while contributing little back to the community


They are totally morally correct imo, but reality simply doesnt work like that. If you disallow free use of your software for commercial purposes, it will simply die.
They also just spent a bit too much money on a single project from what it look like.

“We have invested approximately $300M in R&D over the past decade to offer a modern, general purpose, open source database for everyone. With the added protection of the SSPL, we can continue to invest in R&D and further drive innovation and value for the community.”


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MongoDB

MongoDB has been removed from the Debian, Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux distributions because of the licensing change. Fedora determined that the SSPL version 1 is not a free software license because it is "intentionally crafted to be aggressively discriminatory" towards commercial users.
Questa voce è stata modificata (2 settimane fa)
in reply to MCasq_qsaCJ_234

MongoDB was never about open source but about making money. 10+ years ago they were trying to market their JSON store as capable of anything when it could not even handle objects larger than 64 MB: yeah I know you use collections not nesting but try to aggregate complex data without constantly working around that limit.

The fact that it still exists when there are alternatives that are faster and more efficient amazes me.

Questa voce è stata modificata (2 settimane fa)
in reply to Daerun

The 'traditional' way of storing a database is on a mainframe or supercomputer, where all the information is stored in tables with the information all uniquely stored, frequently containing id references to other tables. For instance, an 'orders' table would have a customer id in it, and the 'customer' table would have their name and address. The programming language for databases like that is SQL - PostGres and Oracle are examples. That model gives you a lot of advantages - the data is always consistent, changes are either made completely or not at all - but every query has to go through one machine, so performance can suck, and you waste a lot of time 'joining' tables together for certain kinds of query.

If you're storing eg. a blog with comments on it, that model doesn't make sense. Each page has a varied selection of comments, comment will have a username and maybe their icon, which will rarely change, but will need to be evaluated by the database every time. It would make more sense to output the pre-rendered page as a JSON blob, and you could have a hundred machines with a few pages each to share the load. Updating people's icons and adding new comments would need to be done by telling each machine to make a certain update if they've a copy of that page; you'd 'eventually' be consistent, but if you don't care about that then you get a very scalable robust solution quite cheaply. Examples of such 'NoSQL' databases are MongoDB, Hadoop and DocumentDB.

Linux foundation have looked at DocumentDB's license and said 'yes, free enough for us', so they'll adopt it.

in reply to addie

tl;dr: MongoDB is Web Scale.
in reply to Daerun

Mongo DB popularized the "document DB" model which is just storing JSON in a database and offering a way to interact with it roughly like you would data in a traditional relational DB.

7ish years ago, they got fed up with the major cloud providers offering their free software as a service and changed their license to one that is more restrictive.

Of course this is sort of the inevitable outcome: a cloud provider builds a competing product and then "open sources" it in a way that will allow them to grab mind share and eventually erode the company that dared to demand compensation for a "free" product.

Microsoft added a middle finger by announcing it just before mongo released quarterly financials too.

in reply to Daerun

DocumentDB is a NoSQL-ish database implementation built on PostgreSQL that has been accepted by the Linux Foundation. It was created by Microsoft (under MIT license) in response to MongoDB's more restrictive licensing.

Time will tell what adoption is like or if Mongo will change it's licensing to be more permissive.

in reply to h54

If MongoDB changes its license back to AGPL it will be another comedy like Redis
in reply to h54

The best option I see for MongoDB is for In-Q-Tel (CIA) or the government to acquire the company.
in reply to IsaamoonKHGDT_6143

TL;DR « Microsoft began developing DocumentDB in 2024 as a set of PostgreSQL extensions »

I can’t help but think : what could go wrong ? 🙄



(Social Security Administration)SSA's chief data officer files a whistleblower complaint that DOGE uploaded a database with every Social Security number ever issued to an insecure cloud server


cross-posted from: programming.dev/post/36366091

::: spoiler Comments
- Hackernews;
- Reddit.
:::

Whistleblower Disclosure.



(Social Security Administration)SSA's chief data officer files a whistleblower complaint that DOGE uploaded a database with every Social Security number ever issued to an insecure cloud server


::: spoiler Comments
- Hackernews;
- Reddit.
:::

Whistleblower Disclosure.


#USA


London targets noisy commuters with headphone campaign: TfL posters are appealing to passengers who blast loud music and calls out their speakers to ‘be respectful.’


  • As 4G and 5G covers more of London's transport network, TfL's campaign is about changing behaviours and encouraging customers to be respectful
  • This supports TfL's existing #TravelKind campaign, which encourages customers to be considerate of one another when using public transport
  • Posters appearing on the Elizabeth line from today and will expand to other TfL services this autumn
  • Customers also reminded to look up from their screens when using public transport in case someone needs their seat more



Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification


cross-posted from: programming.dev/post/36398844

::: spoiler Comments
- Hackernews.
:::



Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification


::: spoiler Comments
- Hackernews.
:::


Technology reshared this.

in reply to Pro

Question 3. Why does Google’s privacy policy allow Google to share “personal information” with any “businesses or persons”?


The Google Paradox

in reply to Pro

It's nice to hear from Mark Murphy on this. He's a legend in the Android space.
Questa voce è stata modificata (2 settimane fa)


in reply to silence7

Explanation? The oil industry and all of it's executives need jail time for treason, just like the current regimes actions, is the explanation. Their decades long assault on the species and the climate and the world, is enough evidence to convict.
in reply to decapitae

The fossil fuel companies (and petro-despotisms) have been in a decades-long conspiracy to lie about the damage their shitty products cause to the climate nad the environment. They should be held liable, and their assets seized as partial payment. Then they should be wound down.
in reply to decapitae

The oil industry and all of it’s executives need jail time for ~~treason~~ crimes against humanity





AI robots are helping South Korea’s seniors feel less alone


A ChatGPT-powered robotic companion called Hyodol is taking over some work from overburdened caregivers, much to the delight of seniors who treat them like grandchildren.
  • South Korea has handed out AI companionship robots to seniors living alone.
  • Eldercare workers say the robots act as their eyes and ears, easing their mind about clients in the days between visits.
  • Older adults form strong bonds with the bots, which occasionally becomes problematic.

in reply to jenesaisquoi

Ich weiß. Wütend macht es mich trotzdem und ich bin eine Person die glaubt, dass Menschen in der Lage sind ihre Meinungen zu ändern, weshalb ich mit solchen Leuten dann auch mal gerne mehr interagieren, als vielleicht für mich gut ist.
in reply to da_cow (she/her)

Mach dir bewusst dass du Meinungen in einem Gespräch immer nur ein Stück ändern kannst, von starker Ablehnung zu schwacher Ablehnung zum Beispiel. Das ist erstmal frustrierend, lässt dich aber kleine Erfolge mehr wertschätzen. Und vielleicht startest du einen Denkprozess, dessen Ende du gar nicht mehr mitbekommst.

reshared this




in reply to solo

Just found a relevant site for the US, called:

Methane Risk Map

Tracking methane-linked health risks to communities.
Questa voce è stata modificata (2 settimane fa)
in reply to solo

Toxic chemicals?! But those have been shown to cause cancer in the state of California!!


121 AI processor companies, $73.5 billion invested: Where are they?



~States with AI processor companies.~

  • AI investment is booming, with $13.5 billion poured into 95 start-ups and an estimated $60 billion in R&D from 26 public companies.
  • Tenstorrent secured over $693 million in Series D funding, with investors including Samsung, LG, and Jeff Bezos backing its open RISC-V CPUs and modular chiplet approach.
  • Lightmatter raised $400 million for photonic interconnects, while Germany’s Black Semiconductor received $275 million in state-led support.
  • Imagination Technologies unveiled its E-Series GPUs, blending graphics and AI in a unified architecture designed for automotive and edge devices.
  • Flow Computing advanced its Parallel Processing Unit, a fresh take on parallelism embedded directly into CPUs.


Source: Jon Peddie Research.





Authors celebrate “historic” settlement coming soon in Anthropic class action


A class-action lawsuit against AI company Anthropic over copyright infringement is nearing settlement, with both parties reaching an agreement in principle1. The lawsuit, filed by authors Andrea Bartz, Kirk Wallace Johnson, and Charles Graeber, alleged Anthropic illegally downloaded millions of books to train its AI models2.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup certified what could be the largest copyright class action ever, potentially including up to 7 million claimants1. The lawsuit claimed Anthropic pirated books from online sources including Books3, Library Genesis, and Pirate Library Mirror2.

"This historic settlement will benefit all class members," said Justin A. Nelson, attorney for the authors1. The parties must file a motion for preliminary approval by September 5, 20251.

While settlement terms remain undisclosed, the case had serious implications - industry advocates warned that if every eligible author filed a claim, it could "financially ruin" the AI industry1. Anthropic had previously argued the lawsuit threatened its survival as a company1.


  1. Ars Technica - Authors celebrate "historic" settlement coming soon in Anthropic class action ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
  2. LA Times - AI company Anthropic settles with authors who alleged piracy ↩︎ ↩︎

Technology reshared this.

in reply to Zerush

Fuck copyright. I don't think individuals should have to pay - even with their private data - to access information, and that means companies shouldn't either. Especially ones providing a public service to people with open weights AI models.
in reply to TheLeadenSea

Research and study material should absolutely not be gated to benefit everyone. But recreational pieces should absolutely be protected.
Questa voce è stata modificata (2 settimane fa)
in reply to SSUPII

should not be gated

should be protected


Insidious language to imply people who restrict one type of information is bad and anti humanity, while restricting information you classify as 'recreational' - that still provides educational background, cultural identity, a sense of shared community and media with friends, and that is literally out of reach for many poor people in first world countries or most people in third world countries, that do not have libraries, or the funds to buy books and videos - or even the devices to play videos on - no, it's 'protecting' the poor rich billionaire authors who live in their mansions because they wrote a book about a wizard they don't want people to read without giving them even more money to attack trans people with.

in reply to TheLeadenSea

There are many indie authors that would lose their only income. I am thinking about these people. Do you really think it is fair for them?
Questa voce è stata modificata (2 settimane fa)
in reply to TheLeadenSea

In a world where people require money to survive, copyright protections ensure writing and other arts remain a realistic (if rarely profitable) activity for those without the luxury of complete financial independence and a wealth of spare time.
Questa voce è stata modificata (2 settimane fa)
in reply to TheLeadenSea

I don't think individuals should have to pay - even with their private data


Agree.

[...] and that means companies shouldn't either.


Disagree.

Whn a person pirates, they usually do it for a) themselves, b) their family or c) a close friend. Some might share on a larger basis.

And other than that, they also usually use it for a) educational or b) entertainment purposes.

For companies, it's alsmost always d) On a larger basis and c) commercially.

As most licences and contracts differentiate the two uses, so should the law.

The fact that I can download a book online and read it (sneakily, and technically illegally) doesn't mean that if I became an AI LLC I could download it, along with thousands of others, to then sell as my AI's "knowledge".

Making that an AI's knowledge is "storing in a retrieval system" and commercial use isn't a free use criterion.

The true problem with (common law) copyright is the fact that it can be bought and sold. Or rather, the author doesn't own it - the publisher does. Which goes against the initial idea of the author getting dividends from their works.



2025: 6 anni di PlusBrothers


26 agosto 2019: i PlusBrothers sono nati come scherzo in un gruppo ristretto su Facebook ma poi l’entusiasmo ci ha portato a valorizzarli come vero esercizio di #scrittura creativa.

I primi anni però abbiamo pubblicato le nostre ispirazioni in modo casuale, senza curarci di quanto senso potessero avere le singole storie.

Ora invece il blog multilingua e il #fediverso ci costringono a fare ordine perché non possiamo continuare a comportarci come se chi legge conoscesse già tutto di noi.

Cancellare le vecchie storie? Non esiste, creiamo l’arcHIVio, lo lasciamo pubblico, e ricominciamo da capo. Il virus senziente ha diritto di presentarsi e partecipare ai nuovi social network decentralizzati al pari (e meglio) degli umani.

Questa voce è stata modificata (2 settimane fa)


47 State and Territory Attorneys General Urge Tech and Payment Platforms to Address Deepfake Exploitation


cross-posted from: programming.dev/post/36394223

Letter.
The attorneys general request that:
1. Search platforms describe how they currently restrict or block deepfake NCII content and tools, and commit to further action to prevent their services from being used to propagate such material.
2. Payment platforms outline how they identify and remove payment authorization for deepfake NCII-related content and commit to proactive enforcement of their terms of service to prevent monetization of this content.




47 State and Territory Attorneys General Urge Tech and Payment Platforms to Address Deepfake Exploitation


Letter.

The attorneys general request that:
1. Search platforms describe how they currently restrict or block deepfake NCII content and tools, and commit to further action to prevent their services from being used to propagate such material.
2. Payment platforms outline how they identify and remove payment authorization for deepfake NCII-related content and commit to proactive enforcement of their terms of service to prevent monetization of this content.



Technology reshared this.


in reply to Pro

Holy shit, I thought it would just be another story of the assistant answering a "Tell me how to die" request (and it did, and it's terrible enough), but there's even worse.

The part where the kid says he'd want to be stopped and the assistant tells him he should hide better to make sure nobody can.

in reply to brsrklf

He has told it that he was writing a story so that all of this was for the story. He didn’t get anything from ChatGPT that he couldn’t have gotten from a search engine or a chat room or Reddit.

He was mentally ill, his feelings were affirmed, and he made a stupid decision that he was clearly in no mental state to make, and it ended up with severe consequences. Hopefully some people learn some lessons from that.

in reply to Pro

This must be the fundamental shift that AI promoters are talking about. No thanks


How To Argue With An AI Booster


cross-posted from: programming.dev/post/36394646

In the last two years I've written no less than 500,000 words, with many of them dedicated to breaking both existent and previous myths about the state of technology and the tech industry itself. While I feel no resentment — I really enjoy writing, and feel privileged to be able to write about this and make money doing so — I do feel that there is a massive double standard between those perceived as "skeptics" and "optimists."

To be skeptical of AI is to commit yourself to near-constant demands to prove yourself, and endless nags of "but what about?" with each one — no matter how small — presented as a fact that defeats any points you may have. Conversely, being an "optimist" allows you to take things like AI 2027 — which I will fucking get to — seriously to the point that you can write an entire feature about fan fiction in the New York Times and nobody will bat an eyelid.

In any case, things are beginning to fall apart. Two of the actual reporters at the New York Times (rather than a "columnist") reported out last week that Meta is yet again "restructuring" its AI department for the fourth time, and that it’s considering "downsizing the A.I. division overall," which sure doesn't seem like something you'd do if you thought AI was the future.

Meanwhile, the markets are also thoroughly spooked by an MIT study covered by Fortune that found that 95% of generative AI pilots at companies are failing, and though MIT NANDA has now replaced the link to the study with a Google Form to request access, you can find the full PDF here, in the kind of move that screams "PR firm wants to try and set up interviews." Not for me, thanks!

In any case, the report is actually grimmer than Fortune made it sound, saying that "95% of organizations are getting zero return [on generative AI]." The report says that "adoption is high, but transformation is low," adding that "...few industries show the deep structural shifts associated with past general-purpose technologies such as new market leaders, disrupted business models, or measurable changes in customer behavior."

Yet the most damning part was the "Five Myths About GenAI in the Enterprise," which is probably the most wilting takedown of this movement I've ever seen:
- AI Will Replace Most Jobs in the Next Few Years → Research found limited layoffs from GenAI, and only in industries that are already affected significantly by AI. There is no consensus among executives as to hiring levels over the next 3-5 years.
- Generative AI is Transforming Business → Adoption is high, but transformation is rare. Only 5% of enterprises have AI tools integrated in workflows at scale and 7 of 9 sectors show no real structural change.
1. Editor's note: Thank you! I made this exact point in February.
- Enterprises are slow in adopting new tech → Enterprises are extremely eager to adopt AI and 90% have seriously explored buying an AI solution.
- The biggest thing holding back AI is model quality, legal, data, risk → What's really holding it back is that most AI tools don't learn and don’t integrate well into workflows.
1. Editor's note: I really do love "the thing that's holding AI back is that it sucks."
- The best enterprises are building their own tools → Internal builds fail twice as often.

These are brutal, dispassionate points that directly deal with the most common boosterisms. Generative AI isn't transforming anything, AI isn't replacing anyone, enterprises are trying to adopt generative AI but it doesn't fucking work, and the thing holding back AI is the fact it doesn't fucking work. This isn't a case where "the enterprise" is suddenly going to save these companies, because the enterprise already tried, and it isn't working.

An incorrect read of the study has been that the "learning gap" that makes these things less useful, when the study actually says that "...the fundamental gap that defines the GenAI divide [is that users resist tools that don't adapt, model quality fails without context, and UX suffers when systems can't remember." This isn't something you learn your way out of. The products don't do what they're meant to do, and people are realizing it.

Nevertheless, boosters will still find a way to twist this study to mean something else. They'll claim that AI is still early, that the opportunity is still there, that we "didn't confirm that the internet or smartphones were productivity boosting," or that we're in "the early days" of AI, somehow, three years and hundreds of billions and thousands of articles in.

I'm tired of having the same arguments with these people, and I'm sure you are too. No matter how much blindly obvious evidence there is to the contrary they will find ways to ignore it. They continually make smug comments about people "wishing things would be bad" or suggesting you are stupid — and yes, that is their belief! — for not believing generative AI is disruptive.

Today, I’m going to give you the tools to fight back against the AI boosters in your life. I’m going to go into the generalities of the booster movement — the way they argue, the tropes they cling to, and the ways in which they use your own self-doubt against you.

They’re your buddy, your boss, a man in a gingham shirt at Epic Steakhouse who won't leave you the fuck alone, a Redditor, a writer, a founder or a simple con artist — whoever the booster in your life is, I want you to have the words to fight them with.




How To Argue With An AI Booster


In the last two years I've written no less than 500,000 words, with many of them dedicated to breaking both existent and previous myths about the state of technology and the tech industry itself. While I feel no resentment — I really enjoy writing, and feel privileged to be able to write about this and make money doing so — I do feel that there is a massive double standard between those perceived as "skeptics" and "optimists."

To be skeptical of AI is to commit yourself to near-constant demands to prove yourself, and endless nags of "but what about?" with each one — no matter how small — presented as a fact that defeats any points you may have. Conversely, being an "optimist" allows you to take things like AI 2027 — which I will fucking get to — seriously to the point that you can write an entire feature about fan fiction in the New York Times and nobody will bat an eyelid.

In any case, things are beginning to fall apart. Two of the actual reporters at the New York Times (rather than a "columnist") reported out last week that Meta is yet again "restructuring" its AI department for the fourth time, and that it’s considering "downsizing the A.I. division overall," which sure doesn't seem like something you'd do if you thought AI was the future.

Meanwhile, the markets are also thoroughly spooked by an MIT study covered by Fortune that found that 95% of generative AI pilots at companies are failing, and though MIT NANDA has now replaced the link to the study with a Google Form to request access, you can find the full PDF here, in the kind of move that screams "PR firm wants to try and set up interviews." Not for me, thanks!

In any case, the report is actually grimmer than Fortune made it sound, saying that "95% of organizations are getting zero return [on generative AI]." The report says that "adoption is high, but transformation is low," adding that "...few industries show the deep structural shifts associated with past general-purpose technologies such as new market leaders, disrupted business models, or measurable changes in customer behavior."

Yet the most damning part was the "Five Myths About GenAI in the Enterprise," which is probably the most wilting takedown of this movement I've ever seen:
- AI Will Replace Most Jobs in the Next Few Years → Research found limited layoffs from GenAI, and only in industries that are already affected significantly by AI. There is no consensus among executives as to hiring levels over the next 3-5 years.
- Generative AI is Transforming Business → Adoption is high, but transformation is rare. Only 5% of enterprises have AI tools integrated in workflows at scale and 7 of 9 sectors show no real structural change.
1. Editor's note: Thank you! I made this exact point in February.
- Enterprises are slow in adopting new tech → Enterprises are extremely eager to adopt AI and 90% have seriously explored buying an AI solution.
- The biggest thing holding back AI is model quality, legal, data, risk → What's really holding it back is that most AI tools don't learn and don’t integrate well into workflows.
1. Editor's note: I really do love "the thing that's holding AI back is that it sucks."
- The best enterprises are building their own tools → Internal builds fail twice as often.

These are brutal, dispassionate points that directly deal with the most common boosterisms. Generative AI isn't transforming anything, AI isn't replacing anyone, enterprises are trying to adopt generative AI but it doesn't fucking work, and the thing holding back AI is the fact it doesn't fucking work. This isn't a case where "the enterprise" is suddenly going to save these companies, because the enterprise already tried, and it isn't working.

An incorrect read of the study has been that the "learning gap" that makes these things less useful, when the study actually says that "...the fundamental gap that defines the GenAI divide [is that users resist tools that don't adapt, model quality fails without context, and UX suffers when systems can't remember." This isn't something you learn your way out of. The products don't do what they're meant to do, and people are realizing it.

Nevertheless, boosters will still find a way to twist this study to mean something else. They'll claim that AI is still early, that the opportunity is still there, that we "didn't confirm that the internet or smartphones were productivity boosting," or that we're in "the early days" of AI, somehow, three years and hundreds of billions and thousands of articles in.

I'm tired of having the same arguments with these people, and I'm sure you are too. No matter how much blindly obvious evidence there is to the contrary they will find ways to ignore it. They continually make smug comments about people "wishing things would be bad" or suggesting you are stupid — and yes, that is their belief! — for not believing generative AI is disruptive.

Today, I’m going to give you the tools to fight back against the AI boosters in your life. I’m going to go into the generalities of the booster movement — the way they argue, the tropes they cling to, and the ways in which they use your own self-doubt against you.

They’re your buddy, your boss, a man in a gingham shirt at Epic Steakhouse who won't leave you the fuck alone, a Redditor, a writer, a founder or a simple con artist — whoever the booster in your life is, I want you to have the words to fight them with.



Technology reshared this.

in reply to Pro

Personally I get a lot of value out of LLMs. I’ve used them almost everyday for the last three years in various projects and general chat bots, but I wouldn’t call myself an AI Booster. I’ve heard the criticisms about Gen AI the author addresses and I believe this is another case of blaming technology instead of the capitalists behind it. Do you hate the fact that a computer can generate text or images or do you really just hate the assholes that unethically scraped all of our human achievements for their benefit and are willing to destroy everything to enrich themselves on our labor? I bet it’s the latter.
in reply to handsoffmydata

It's the latter, counter point; the tool never would have existed without the unethical scraping.
in reply to Pro

(The paste above stops just before the table of contents)

wheresyoured.at/how-to-argue-w…


in reply to Davriellelouna

It's times like this I wonder about the like/dislike paradigm I.E. "I like/dislike knowing this and/or appreciate the perceived reputability of the source" vs. "This is good news/I fucking hate this."

This one just got a "I fucking hate this" from me.

in reply to wuphysics87

More of the first, but not exactly. It's "Other people should see and know about this too" and "This isn't worth anybody's time/is factually wrong and shouldn't have been posted."

Because that's what upvoting does, makes it higher in the page so more people are able to see it.

Questa voce è stata modificata (1 settimana fa)


29. August 2025, 15:00:00 UTC - GMT - Donau Vista Würstel Club, 3422, Sankt Andrä-Wördern, Österreich
Ago 29
Donau Vista Sunset Club
Ven 17:00 - 18:00
Donau Vista Würstel Club (inoffiziell)

Langsam wird’s später im Sommer – aber noch lange nicht leiser.


Diesmal übernehmen Ursula, Gümix und Andreas Weisz die musikalische Regie,
 und vertonen den Sonnenuntergang und die Nacht mit organischen Beats und satten Bässen.

Der Altarm leuchtet, der Bass rollt, der Abend gehört euch.

Eintritt frei = Spende willkommen. Wer kann, der gibt – wer nicht kann, tanzt trotzdem mit.

Kommen, lauschen, treiben lassen.



How To Argue With An AI Booster


In the last two years I've written no less than 500,000 words, with many of them dedicated to breaking both existent and previous myths about the state of technology and the tech industry itself. While I feel no resentment — I really enjoy writing, and feel privileged to be able to write about this and make money doing so — I do feel that there is a massive double standard between those perceived as "skeptics" and "optimists."

To be skeptical of AI is to commit yourself to near-constant demands to prove yourself, and endless nags of "but what about?" with each one — no matter how small — presented as a fact that defeats any points you may have. Conversely, being an "optimist" allows you to take things like AI 2027 — which I will fucking get to — seriously to the point that you can write an entire feature about fan fiction in the New York Times and nobody will bat an eyelid.

In any case, things are beginning to fall apart. Two of the actual reporters at the New York Times (rather than a "columnist") reported out last week that Meta is yet again "restructuring" its AI department for the fourth time, and that it’s considering "downsizing the A.I. division overall," which sure doesn't seem like something you'd do if you thought AI was the future.

Meanwhile, the markets are also thoroughly spooked by an MIT study covered by Fortune that found that 95% of generative AI pilots at companies are failing, and though MIT NANDA has now replaced the link to the study with a Google Form to request access, you can find the full PDF here, in the kind of move that screams "PR firm wants to try and set up interviews." Not for me, thanks!

In any case, the report is actually grimmer than Fortune made it sound, saying that "95% of organizations are getting zero return [on generative AI]." The report says that "adoption is high, but transformation is low," adding that "...few industries show the deep structural shifts associated with past general-purpose technologies such as new market leaders, disrupted business models, or measurable changes in customer behavior."

Yet the most damning part was the "Five Myths About GenAI in the Enterprise," which is probably the most wilting takedown of this movement I've ever seen:
- AI Will Replace Most Jobs in the Next Few Years → Research found limited layoffs from GenAI, and only in industries that are already affected significantly by AI. There is no consensus among executives as to hiring levels over the next 3-5 years.
- Generative AI is Transforming Business → Adoption is high, but transformation is rare. Only 5% of enterprises have AI tools integrated in workflows at scale and 7 of 9 sectors show no real structural change.
1. Editor's note: Thank you! I made this exact point in February.
- Enterprises are slow in adopting new tech → Enterprises are extremely eager to adopt AI and 90% have seriously explored buying an AI solution.
- The biggest thing holding back AI is model quality, legal, data, risk → What's really holding it back is that most AI tools don't learn and don’t integrate well into workflows.
1. Editor's note: I really do love "the thing that's holding AI back is that it sucks."
- The best enterprises are building their own tools → Internal builds fail twice as often.

These are brutal, dispassionate points that directly deal with the most common boosterisms. Generative AI isn't transforming anything, AI isn't replacing anyone, enterprises are trying to adopt generative AI but it doesn't fucking work, and the thing holding back AI is the fact it doesn't fucking work. This isn't a case where "the enterprise" is suddenly going to save these companies, because the enterprise already tried, and it isn't working.

An incorrect read of the study has been that the "learning gap" that makes these things less useful, when the study actually says that "...the fundamental gap that defines the GenAI divide [is that users resist tools that don't adapt, model quality fails without context, and UX suffers when systems can't remember." This isn't something you learn your way out of. The products don't do what they're meant to do, and people are realizing it.

Nevertheless, boosters will still find a way to twist this study to mean something else. They'll claim that AI is still early, that the opportunity is still there, that we "didn't confirm that the internet or smartphones were productivity boosting," or that we're in "the early days" of AI, somehow, three years and hundreds of billions and thousands of articles in.

I'm tired of having the same arguments with these people, and I'm sure you are too. No matter how much blindly obvious evidence there is to the contrary they will find ways to ignore it. They continually make smug comments about people "wishing things would be bad" or suggesting you are stupid — and yes, that is their belief! — for not believing generative AI is disruptive.

Today, I’m going to give you the tools to fight back against the AI boosters in your life. I’m going to go into the generalities of the booster movement — the way they argue, the tropes they cling to, and the ways in which they use your own self-doubt against you.

They’re your buddy, your boss, a man in a gingham shirt at Epic Steakhouse who won't leave you the fuck alone, a Redditor, a writer, a founder or a simple con artist — whoever the booster in your life is, I want you to have the words to fight them with.



47 State and Territory Attorneys General Urge Tech and Payment Platforms to Address Deepfake Exploitation


Letter.

The attorneys general request that:
1. Search platforms describe how they currently restrict or block deepfake NCII content and tools, and commit to further action to prevent their services from being used to propagate such material.
2. Payment platforms outline how they identify and remove payment authorization for deepfake NCII-related content and commit to proactive enforcement of their terms of service to prevent monetization of this content.
Questa voce è stata modificata (2 settimane fa)


Donald Trump's 50% tariff on India kicks in as PM Modi urges self-reliance


The US president's steep 50% tariffs on India have kicked in, sending Narendra Modi's government into firefighting mode.


Archived version: archive.is/20250827045217/bbc.…


Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.



Nvidia's quarterly report will gauge the temperature of the AI craze


Artificial intelligence bellwether Nvidia is poised to release a quarterly report that’s expected provide a better sense about whether the stock market has been riding on an overhyped bubble or whether it’s being propelled by a technological boom that’s still gathering momentum



Cannabis users who are self-medicating run higher risk of paranoia, study finds


Those who take drug because of pain, anxiety or depression found to be more likely to develop paranoia than recreational smokers


Archived version: archive.is/newest/theguardian.…


Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.



Attempt to partner African countries with Japanese cities triggers xenophobic backlash


Cities in Japan have received thousands of complaints amid confusion over scheme that was intended to foster closer ties


Archived version: archive.is/newest/theguardian.…


Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.



French, German and Polish leaders head to Moldova to denounce Russian 'interference' ahead of vote


Leaders from France, Germany and Poland are headed to Moldova Wednesday on the eve of the campaign for next month's high-stakes parliamentary election. Moldova's pro-EU President Maia Sandu described the European leaders' visit as a "show of support" for the former Soviet republic in the face of what the government has denounced as Russian interference.


Archived version: archive.is/newest/france24.com…


Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.



How Mexico lifted 13.4 million out of poverty in six years


Rather than poverty reduction stemming from economic growth, it has been achieved through a redistribution of resources.


Archived version: archive.is/newest/peoplesdispa…


Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.



EU-backed Libyan patrol boat fires hundreds of rounds onto rescue vessel, says NGO


An EU-backed Libyan Coast Guard boat fired hundreds of rounds at a charity vessel damaging onboard rescue speed boats and putting bullet holes in windows on the bridge, says an NGO.


Archived version: archive.is/20250826050804/euob…


Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.