You’re dead on. This kind of knee-deep gluey “advice” is the cult of personality that intel now thinks is effective planning. The head’s-down hard work of the 80’s and 90’s vanished when the media turned Grove into a reluctant folk hero and the bubble burst. I was there for 21 years, this guy is symptom of a much larger problem that is self-sustaining. Too many people trying to hide, do the bare minimum, and collect a fat paycheck, while people like this wave around grand plans that will never be touched. Yep I’m a cynic, two decades there fried my compassion circuits.
A kvm that requires Chinese dns servers? Just the fact it KvM over Ethernet should set off alarm bells from here till next Thursday. I would have a hard time trusting an internet based kvm.
Anyone who traded tech stocks in the 1990s when AmeriTrade appeared remembers this story.
Have the LLMS trade anything BUT tech stocks and see how they do.
That’s the real test.
EDIT: I remember this is probably before AmeriTrade offered options. I was calling in trades at 6:30AM PST to my broker while he probably laughed at me. But the point is the same: any doofus could make money buying tech stocks and holding for a few weeks. Companies were splitting constantly.
I was happy when Netflix was a DVD service. Streaming turned everything to shit. Netflix in 2003-2008 was its golden era: any movie you could think of from the past century was available.
I will not lament the loss of visual mass media. I’ve already reduced my viewing to just Kanopy, but even they are reducing tickets.
Fortunately there are plenty of other fun and entertaining things to do than sit in front of a screen and drool at slop.
Unfortunately people will “suffer” with their first-world problems of not getting new Marvel movies every 8 months or Spider-Man reboots every 2 years, or having to pay $100+/month for drivel. Oh the humanity.
When Carl Sagan said, "The cosmos is within us. We are made of star-stuff. We are a way for the universe to know itself" he was poetically accurate. The comets are seeded with the remains of untold countless exploded stars.
There's a theory that at the very beginnings of the universe, as it cooled down, there was a period where the average temperature of the universe was between 0-100º C, meaning the whole universe was within a "habitable" temperature range, and this could have supercharged the creation of the building blocks of life. I think I learned about it on a Veritasium video... Maybe someone knows which one? :)
Veritasium videos are often extremely misleading. In this case the cooling universe lacked carbon for these organic compounds. Life cares about 0-100c because of water which depends on Oxygen would be missing etc.
Just as example in one video he refers to the field outside of the wire carrying the energy for electricity, however EM waves propagate at the speed of light and fall off at the square of distance. Electricity can travel thousands of miles without that kind of falloff but doesn’t propagate as fast because it’s electron density in the wires that causes what we think of as electricity. He then setups up an antenna and … well you get the idea.
It's sorting and mixing. Comets, asteroids, and planets all had different factors governing their formation (sorting). When comets or asteroids hit planets, you get a mixture of those different compositions.
God is just an extra step. If you assume god existed forever and nobody created her, then why not just accept that the universe existed forever and cut out the middle-deity.
No, this is HN where we voraciously advocate for the libertarian ideals of "I do what I want" then pontificate about the tragedy of the commons from an ivory tower when it inevitably all goes wrong.
“Smart kid” who did “poorly at school” is a fascinating doublespeak. School is where you demonstrate you are smart. Skilled is different from smart btw. Not being able to do an integral but being able to tune a holly four barrel carb are not the same thing. It’s just baffling that you would make this claim.
An example from my personal life: I aced many academic tests without effort, but couldn't remember which lesson was in which building on which day. I was often late, and discovered many distractions that were far more interesting than school, leading to truancy. So I was indeed a "smart kid" who "did poorly at school".
That was literally the same thought that crossed my mind. I agree wholeheartedly, accusing everything and everyone of being AI is getting old fast. Part of me is happy that the skepticism takes hold quickly, but I don't think it's necessary for everyone to demonstrate that they are a good skeptic.
(and I suspect that plenty of people will remain credulous anyway, AI slop is going to be rough to deal with for the foreseeable future).
Spammers use AI comments to build reputation on a fleet of accounts for upvoting purposes.
That may or may not be what's happening with this account, but it's worth flagging accounts that generate a lot of questionable comments. If you look at that account's post history there's a lot of familiar LLM patterns and repeated post fragments.
In the current setup, having enough money protects you from the laws of the country and the judgment of others. Thiel is rich enough and therefore powerful enough that these culture wars will never personally affect him or anyone he cares about.
I've always suspected this mentality had a lot to do with why Peter Thiel is like that. Growing up in the wreckage of the AIDS crisis and thinking to yourself, "I don't have to go down with them. I don't ever have to be like them. I'm still here, because I'm smarter, I'm better than them." I'd never admit any of this publicly, but I have a lot of similar thoughts as a trans woman who slipped through all the cracks and ended up wealthy in my thirties. Poverty is the tip of the discrimination spear and you really could buy your way out of it all.
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition...There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
I'm quite aware of the origin, but I appreciate you posting the link for others' edification.
For one with less confusion about the speaker: "For my friends everything, for my enemies the law." --Oscar R. Benavides, President of Peru from 1933 to 1939
The weird part isn't that a socialist got elected mayor of New York. The weird part is that the Democratic party didn't have anyone better to primary him out of the nomination.
The two-party system seems pretty cooked at this point.
Personally I find that quote tired and trite. But so-called "conservatives" could certainly stand to clear up the matter by articulating what their constructive political stances actually are these days - that is beyond merely vice signalling, performative cruelty, and a cult of personality around Dear Leader.
As a libertarian, I certainly have my problems with the progressive orthodoxy. But every time I've tried to work out current conservative principles, by generally appealing to what they claim to be, I've basically just gotten a brush off of why those traditional ideals are not applicable and then a bunch of whataboutism to justify why they have to kill our society to purportedly save it.
TBF Trump isn't a conservative. He's a populist that overthrew the Republican party without firing a single shot and the "conservatives" are all too busy running around in circles to do something about him.
Sure, I agree and I've made similar arguments. But there are still throngs of people self-identifying as conservative and considering Trump conservative. The best I've been able to surmise is that to them, "conservative" merely means in line with the reactionary talk radio of the past several decades, and that anger has replaced all of their ideals.
This is kind of understandable, because that reactionary talk radio was always a form of managed dissent. They kept getting tricked by it, and as communications democratized they somewhat realized this (hence the whole RINO thing). But as usual they're unable to see the larger overall picture, and so direct blame at whomever scapegoats their new info-bubble managers point at.
While I think one party started it back in the '90s, both parties are mostly 2-minute hate daily talking point driven at this point.
I don't think that bodes well for our geopolitical competitiveness in the long run. And you can already see it in the irrational hatred of renewables on the right and the irrational hatred of AI on the left. Meanwhile, enough of the rest of the world has better things to do that we seem destined to become a geopolitical NPC.
While the Democratic party has strongly embraced the 2-minute hate in much of their propaganda, I do not think the both sidesism is warranted. The point is that Republicans have taken their 2-minute hate dynamic of the past several decades, and retconned that anger as the entirety of their policy platform. Whereas Democratic leaders are still trying for constructive policies that abide by their own ideals. We can criticize those ideals, and criticize their policies for failing to live up to those ideals, yes. But their platform doesn't revolve around overtly harming the country with the idea that the other tribe will be harmed more.
As for the "irrational hatred" of "AI", isn't that what laying the groundwork for controlled opposition and regulatory capture looks like? There have been serious problems from lack of business accountability and responsiveness, now exacerbated by AI. But pigeonholing it all into an "AI bad" narrative is basically setting up to defeat any specific reforms.
My take on the democrats at this point is they are the party of learned helplessness. And that's just as harmful as the party of nihilism when they both drop their differences to block the emergence of new voices and new parties.
But I agree they have become the useful idiots for regulatory capture. The right's hatred of renewables is just stupid.
Learned helplessness is not as harmful as nihilism. Learned helplessness has lead to inaction and ineffectiveness, which has at least allowed for stability. Whereas nihilism has led to lashing out, which is quite destructive.
Learned helplessness is just another term for complicit IMO. I'm reminded of the streaming media people whining about licensing terms rather than taking responsibility for their poor job at negotiating with the studios and other holders of media.
if these supposed elected representatives can't take the responsibilities of their jobs and they just want the perks, they need to resign to make room for someone better. Not holding my breath there.
I don't know if much useful can come out of speaking purely in platitudes. I agree there is a lot of blame to be laid at the feet of the Democratic party. But it's important to not lose sight of the larger picture where the Republican party took the status quo of both parties being similarly bad, as an opportunity to become even worse.
The secret is that their racism and bigotry is more important to them than their conservative "values".
See also: the success of the "Southern Strategy" in converting racists in the southern US from Democratic to Republican voters, taking advantage of the Democratic Party's focus on civil rights.
As long as Trump keeps hurting the people they don't like, they'll continue to support him.
I used to think this was deep, but it equally applies to progressivism as well as well as a range of human institutions. It's a restatement the basic observation that humans are prone to in-group bias. What's really dangerous is that some refuse to see the same flaw within themselves and instead always ascribe it to "the other".
It's in the proud tradition of Roy Cohn, Grover Norquist and countless others that cause a huge surge in grindr usage whenever there's a Republican event anywhere.
I think it's more and more evident that the ultra rich (and their circles of subordinates) don't actually care about the common divisive topical areas. It seems to be the playbook that they have a divisive stance to put them in a specific camp (at their convenience). History has shown us that those ultra rich have no regard to flip flopping as it sees fit to their outcomes. It has nothing to do with self hate or being savvy - the reality is: it doesn't matter for them because nobody in their circle cares. I think that's very evident with Thiel.
If you don't think so, play this game: how would things change for Peter Thiel if he was of a different race? It wouldn't. Greed is blind to these superficial facets that drive the normies up the wall. It's truly by design. And it's so broadly accepted you don't even need to hide these things anymore which only adds insult to injury.
The superrich in general don't care about being hypocritical, so I wouldn't pay too much attention to his personal preferences. Just look at the Epstein situation. The superrich frequented there.
That maybe why he seems to be targetting Catholics rather than evangelicals.
The problem is that in much of the world (e.g. the UK) Catholics are historically left wing, AND uninterested in apocalyptic ideas so it seems a big ask.
The article does not leave me with any understanding of what his ideas actually are.
"In late modernity, where science has become scary and apocalyptic, and the legionnaires of the antichrist like Eliezer Yudkowsky, Nick Bostrom and Greta Thunberg argue for world government to stop science, the antichrist has somehow become anti-science."
It also explains some of the contradictions in JD Vance - if Thiel is influencing him, or if he is simply saying things to keep Thiel's donations coming in.
the rube demographic, e.g. the ones who believe the anti-christ stuff, will eat it up.
they already pander to trump, who is about as un-christian as you can get.
thiel will make all of the right moves and do the secret "actually one of us" handshake and those idiots will eat it up; his billionaire buddies will do the rest.
Imagine you’re an elite billionaire in America. Half your peers have made a "party" trip to Epstein island. What difference does a little gay sex make in that context?
