That matters quite a bit on who is at the party and what kind of party of it is, now, doesn't it? I don't know what kind of parties you get invited to, if any, but the Slashdot comment section could never be confused with any party I have ever attended.

If you want everyone to have a bio page who wants one there is already anti-social media to solve that "problem". Your comment has the appearance of being made by someone who doesn't understand how Wikipedia works.

If I had a Wikipedia page I would insist it be deleted. Wikipedia is good for facts, so science articles and that sort of thing makes sense. Too many people think if they read it on Wikipedia it must be true, and it is far too easy for a bad actor to make changes that spread misinformation and malign ones character. They are trying to fight the onslaught of misinformation and disinformation, and anyone who is against their efforts to do that tells me everything I need to know about them.

Your post has the appearance of being written by someone who hasn't even read the summary (or understood if they did.) It quite explicitly states that their concern isn't more available information, it is the proliferation of misinformation and their inability to keep that in check. They would rather have fewer articles that are more accurate than more articles that are likely to be less accurate. It's a trade-off based on reason and logic. If you want to know more about not particularly notable people and aren't concerned with truth you can just go to their twitter, Tik Tok, etc. No need for a wikipedia page.

No - it's not just about the participants. It's about all the people who get drawn there because they can *read* the information. Reddit will die a slow quiet death. But the MBA's who monetized it will be happy because they'll get their wad of cash then move on.

I started using reddit *specifically* because I could read answers to web searches. Later I created a login so I could ask specific questions. Blocking users out from even reading content, essentially making it a walled garden that you have to log into to even read is the beginning of the end. New users will see an initial bump as a handful of people make accounts, then disappear as search results become less and less applicable to current problems because they aren't indexed. Reddit is currently an amazing repository of knowledge. Now it's dying, all to appease yet another money making scheme by trashy people with garbage MBA's all about 'adding shareholder value'.

As long as the inflation of your assets beats the inflation of your expenses, sure. People love to say "$1M isn't so much anymore anyways!" If you have $1M in the S&p500, you have 3.7% of that ($37K) invested in the energy sector. Returns on the energy sector: 61% over the 12 months ending 10/29/2026 - a $22,600 gain. That's a lot of gas money! But yeah, you have to be invested and have equity in the system. Then even the bad things have a silver lining quite often (or in this case, a minor windfall).

That's just not the case

https://thehustle.co/hs-fs/hub... 1/6 of US households now have over $1M in net worth. There are millions of us all over, living comfortably in retirement, balances go up and down but mainly up. Stick with investing and towards retirement it and your annual growtih will likely dwarf what your salary ever did. Buy and hold low cost index funds, it works.

Ultimately your tech gets outmoded, then you have to act. "Searching" is a big waste of time compared to just having your question answered.

I keep getting banned, and I don't even know why. Then log in with an old account and they ban that, for 'attempting to circumvent the first ban.' Do that a couple times and the weeklong ban because a perma-ban for "repeatedly" doing all the above.

It's such a joke, they go hyperbolic running some story that Elon Musk banned somebody from Twitter. Then they ban like crazy at the drop of a hat.

Even if AI didn't "funadamentally" advance at all for the next decade, human/AI interaction will be revolutionized by the end of that time through that use of AI alone. Every phone I get, I hate re-learning the menu structures. That is so over. From now on it should be, "hey google - in 3 seconds take a photo with the flash." Of for cars of course GOOG has Waymo. "Take me to Safeway." done. Not to say that alone would justify the AI-driven valuation of today's stock market, but even that would be a big thing. Much more important than the XeroxX Parc "miracle demos" people have been playing up for the last 50 years.

Disagree, you're incentivizing insiders to leak information. What do you think of the rash of stories along these lines? https://www.jpost.com/israel-n...

Big difference is investing is a net positive. It is possible for everybody to win, and in fact over time, most do. That' plenty of difference to affect public policy.

I'm not going to waste my time defending against your strawman attack. I never said "a successful exploit cannot be detected", I said that not all exploits are detected and this one is unlikely to be detected. Since you don't understand that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence any further proof that you lack basic reasoning skills is completely superfluous. Now seriously, you showed that you have some knowledge (but lack a lot of other skills that would qualify you to make the strong claim without having any actual evidence, or that you posses the basic reasoning skills necessary to determine if it is correct.) Don't confuse the fact that I acknowledged that you have a basic understanding that with any indication that your analysis is correct. Off you go now ...

The good old says were when there were about 60 million people on the internet and it was new and unknown.

I think it wasn't social media that changed it for the worse, at least not perse, it was the internet-connected phone.