The issue is to become a successful CEO you tend to have to believe your own lies and very quickly surround yourself with sycophants. Whats more if you buck this trend you tend to limit your skillset as societally we reward bullshit more than results.

fire it into space futurama style

https://mailinabox.email/

cash is not known for its inherent security properties

put your cash in a safe; don’t give agents access to your banking api

I buy my cloud hosting with soy futures, of course

I’m more asking what cash is supposedly giving you

I don’t think it’s a good alternative, I should have said.

Cash? Which has its value controlled by a central bank which will devalue the wads under your mattress to help bail out their friends? Commodities are king.

I guess the alternative is streaming? I don’t think we’re going to be getting another generation of subsidised hardware.

I haven’t thought about geforce now for a while. It’s a bit of a different prospect now it’s owned by the highest valued company in America.

I think steam deck 2 as and when it comes out will be a golden age. I think it stands a chance to completely consolidate the market.

That isn’t what I remotely said. I was making the point that if you want to make a credible argument against AI on an ethical basis you command more authority by accommodating a charitable account of it’s function e.g. not say it’s useless.

What process is there which successfully prevents AI code submissions? I wonder if we’re even having the right discussion here. It’s a very hard thing to police when people are doing work for free.

Wouldn’t it be more like the LLM presented a plan which involved cutting people into quarters then a human rubber stamped it and the people were cut into quarters?

Conversations on this subject will continue to stagnate and miss the important points as long as people continue to act like the discussion of ethics is the same as the discussion of efficacy. People who disagree with AI on a principle of its impacts being negative will often call it “a lying machine which is regularly wrong and offers no utility”.

May I suggest that people with criticisms of the ethics and impact of AI take a charitable position towards the utility offered by AI. Accept something along the lines of a positive account given by an experienced software engineer - it’s useful, it presents risks but also it presents new ways to get certain work done well in much less time etc.

Even if you do not believe this, the point is it is a much more ambiguous argument than the ethical argument or the concerns over the impact of AI on the species, environment or society. You weaken those arguments by putting them along side poorly justified, somewhat falsifiable claims that AI just doesn’t work.

My main complaint about GIMP is I have attempted to use it about 10 times in the last 20 years and I have never actually understood how to use it. I realise this arguably says more about me than GIMP but I also think I’m in the upper quartile of computer competence and I did an undergraduate module in computer graphics - surely this is it’s #1 issue. But this is where I understand the paradigm of how its UX operates is beyond reproach.

Yeah he’s been pretty good at documenting development and it’s definitely a human led development process.

GIMP’s main issue is the UI issues the majority of people see is the idiosyncratic, well-loved UI it’s most die hard fans would die defending. I swear Adobe astroturf resistance against it being improved…

As one of the most iconic consumer software FOSS projects this is enormous. Huge congrats to the team who picked this up in the last couple of years.

It’s not all or nothing it’s just America isn’t a trustworthy place to hold anything you don’t want accessed by a corrupt government. I wouldn’t use a Russian service, I wouldn’t use an American service.

I mean the real answer is if you want privacy it needs to be trustless.