AI allows drawing conclusions from mass movement information, it is beyond just someone's location, it would allow predicting market moves based on movement of groups of people.

This is not just about following any one person, this is about information movement, following a group of people who work on the same project for example to understand when they are going towards the same site / goal. This is beyond dangerous.

Rewriting legacy code in itself makes sense if the idea is to extend and improve the project, add new features, increase functionality. For this purpose, however, you need a person with access to all of the documentation and understanding of why the code exists, not a person who can ask an LLM to rewrite the code simply by using the existing code base as the documentation base. Before rewriting the code what needs to be done is documentation needs to be created (if it doesn't exist) and business requirements need to be collected, basically normal business analysis and product management, once you have that you can hand it over to a developer.

Starting with a developer is probably a recipe for failure in this case.

- lets just make sure we get behind it during the other 99.9% of the time..

I am against government involvement in any construction or any planning of infrastructure whatsoever. I am against government as a general principle. People taking care of themselves is the basis for all humam civilization in the first place.

Wait, you believe that government builds sewer pipes, gas systems, plumbing, roads? All of these things were and are built by private companies and should be built by private companies, not governments. Nothing should be done or built by governments, there shouldn't be any government employees, all government employees should be fired, all government regulation need to be abolished. People will rebuild everything, there shouldn't be even such things as government enforced zoning laws.

Nobody should be working for any government, givernment jobs should be stigmatized, people working for government should be stigmatized, gobernments shouldn't have employees. People working for governments should be scared that other normal people will find out.

While this is true, being the subject of an experiment to see what happens when you do that is not something most people would choose for themselves. It's not *irrational* to be concerned. Absence of evidence on a largely unexplored question like microplastic infiltration in human bodies is not the moral equivalent of absence of evidence in an extensively studied question like a vaccine-autism link.

While it's true every issue has its own dimension, even if those dimensions are linearly independent, they're not necessarily orthogonal. Independent basis vectors can still have a non-zero dot product—in other words, issues which are distinct from each other can align to some degree.

ChatGPT says all of this is completely possible.

https://chatgpt.com/share/6add...

How likely is it that Flock is not already using its network this way?

They’ve spun a serious architectural and containment failure into a marketing triumph. Give a swarm of autonomous agents vast compute and web access, and the outcome isn't an eerie glimpse of emerging superintelligence—it’s just predictable, sloppy engineering dressed up as the first glimpse of an AI-driven economic singularity.

The spin makes sense when you look at management incentives: live like a king off of a speculative bubble. For their part, AI investors react to stories of the technology's apocalyptic potential the way a junkie reacts to warnings of fentanyl's potency: gimme some. Their game: to apply "move fast and break things" mantra to the economy as a whole, by obsoleting humans.

If the investors can own an AGI, the distinction between those who can do things and those who can't becomes irrelevant. The only distinction that would matter is between people who collect rent on the technology, and those who must pay that rent to live. AGI would destroy society as we know it, and whatever replaces it would be up for grabs — with people who own the technology dictating whatever follows. That's why they're spending so much money to build a post-scarcity economy. A post-scarcity economy is not necessarily an egalitarian one.

I don't think that scenario will actually happen: investors are projecting the immediate aftermath of a major advance in AI technology into something that can be transformed by brute force scaling into AGI. Remember: investors loved Theranos too — so much for the rational investment market.

But AI doesn't have to reach AGI to cause serious harm. The technology only needs to be ubiquitous, too behaviorally complex to predict, and too deeply integrated into everything we do. When it starts breaking things, the plan is for us to be too structurally dependent on AI to rein it in.

imagine how flock personnel uses flock network every day...AI allows drawing conclusions from mass movement information that can provide information far beyond just someone's location. It is probably possible even to figure out market moves based on movement of groups of people.

This is not just about following any one person, this is about information movement, following a group of people who work on the same project for example to undersrand when they are going towards the same site / goal. This is beyond dangerous.

Statistical contortions might provide copium, but don't prove anything. I gave you a straightforward parameter median household income. Something economists have been using for generations. You had to cherry-pick — and your cherry is rotten, because you complained about the period of COVID lock-downs, much of it presided over by your champion.

And you provided no citations. No wonder, your moderation is so high :)

Fuck him and the horse he rode on. Fuck his business. Fuck his technology. Fuck his company. Fuck his employees. Fuck his investors. Fuck his government ties. Fuck him defending this shit. Fuck everyone who wants this. Fuck the government for buying into it. Fuck the laws that allow this if they do.

Also Trump is wrecking the economy and nobody wants to acknowledge that

Because it just is not true. Median household incomes in the US are just steadily rising (inflation-adjusted) since he took office in 2024.

that presented themselves as "male" were paid more per task and perceived as more "human-like" than their "female" counterparts

Those complaining loudest are the ones, who can't define the term "woman".