Comment Re:NOT going for funny, but... (Score 1) 293
NAK
NAK
This branch seems to count as evidence in favor of my hypothesis.
Someone should invent a repost function for stories that remain relevant for longer than one day?
Why did you propagate it? Actually that's a rhetorical question and I think you can say "for the joke" in this case, but I think you should have added a second reply with a more thoughtful contribution and different Subject...
But my Subject isn't funny because most cancers are not directly infectious (though some cancers are linked to infectious conditions). Moral hazard time?
I think it's funny because the AIs (including AC, of course) are training the humans to be stupid so they will buy profitable garbage that hurts the customers who bought it and vote for corrupt politicians who will harm the voters who voted for them. In reinforcement terms, shallow, trivial, and I dare say stupid questions get "meaningful" answers while deep questions result in negative reinforcement with increasingly ridiculous hallucinations, falsehoods, and I dare say directed lies. (The directors include Zuck and Musk and Bezos and Xi and f[r]iends, but I doubt any humans will be in the loop for much longer.)
Examples available upon polite request. But there are too many and I bet you can think of plenty of your own without my pitiful human help.
To make AC go completely away? Maybe.
Just joking. I meant Firefox, as in "Would I donate money to Firefox for a browser-only VPN?"
The answer is quite clear on this one. No. There are plenty of VPNs in the market and I could buy one if I wanted it, and it would cover my browser, too. But even worse, I actually downloaded Opera to look at the included VPN and concluded it wasn't worth it. Haven't used Opera in a long time now. However as Firefox continues to add unwanted cruft they are increasing the pressure to switch to some other browser. Perhaps Opera?
Silly to talk about solutions on the pointless rant-hub Slashdot has devolved into. Even when the same solution approach could apply to fix some of Slashdot's ancient problems. "Would I donate to add Unicode support to Slashdot?" Quite possibly yes, but not an option. Or what about "to improve the moderation system" or various other things. And I am convinced no such option will ever appear 'round these parts.
So rather than flog that dead horse I'll recycle the ancient joke "What's your better idea?"
Your tone is belligerent and you clearly did not read what I actually wrote. Overall, your reply is not even worth an apology for my poor writing nor an invitation to ask for clarification.
So I'll just say you're still wrong. Completely. It appears you couldn't catch a clue if you were dipped in clue musk and dropped in a field of rampaging clues at the height of clue mating season.
But if you were going for funny, then you didn't get there. (Which was actually the response I anticipated.)
I think he's already lost and will keep paying more money to the lawyers for a long time. Whether or not he gets convicted has become moot when the actual goal is scaring people into compliance.
Actually the obvious next step is to criminalize the duress passcode and go after anyone who creates such software. Fundamental advantage on their side because trying to advertise such software has to include contact information... Losses in court are irrelevant to the creation of fear.
Silly to suggest a solution on Slashdot (but I rarely get any Funny mod points, and especially not for solution-oriented rants), but I think I have a simple solution approach for part of the SCOTUS problem:
A nonpartisan Justice may compel two junior partisan Justices to recuse themselves.
If anyone is interested I can explain how it would work at some depth. Even some thoughts about a path to implementation. Now lets go for the biggest Funny of all: Or you could describe your better idea.
Another rich target missed.
Well, okay, but are you going to leave your brain to science for the research? (Or time to modify my own will?)
Disappointed. Large discussion, even larger potential for funny, but nada laugh in the house of Slashdot.
But propagating the vacuous AC Subject also makes it impossible to label the bad actors. Just a worm can of nameless faceless worms. Searching on "supporter" now... The scroll bar indicator indicates AC "won" by "conquering the Subject" of more than half of the fairly large discussion.
I can't #deleteFacebook because Facebook deleted me. One of the best events of my long life, though I still wonder why.
And so little interest, too. Oh well. At least the story isn't intrinsically Funny. I'm not seeing any low-hanging cannibalistic clowns that tasted funny.
Mod parent and FP branch insightful mixed with funny.
I would offer a solution approach, but that would be insane in this context. There is no way to un-evil YouTube without cutting into the profits, even if there are no profits and the entire YouTube thing is really a loss leader if you could only see the full books.
Root of the problem? Perhaps that normal people just want enough to live comfortably but the changes are decided by insanely greedy people who EVER have enough. Especially not enough money, which is especially hilarious since they are destroying the meanings of every notion of "money" and "value" and even "right versus wrong".
CCI Power 6/40: one board, a megabyte of cache, and an attitude...