People are going to continue using Twitter because of network effects and not being committed to an ideal enough to give up access to information and content. But if they can be persuaded to use a frontend, at least Twitter is getting much less out of those people.
We’re never going to break the monopoly of these companies over the web by relying on the willingness of people to make personal sacrifices, tools like Nitter are really important.
Why do they want it? Accelerationism?
Original content is good, but something I see sometimes and really dislike is unsourced screenshots of text, or otherwise something that contains factual claims that do not point you to a way to read more and verify them. Even if it happens to be true, normalizing that increases our susceptibility to misinformation by making it more difficult to detect and call out.
I feel like most people won’t want to buy it if they look at this page though lol
I’d rather know so I can not eat the sucked donuts
Very cryptic message
Just that you wouldnt be able to see the point because you’re from the US.
Given the context it seems more like an argument contradicting OP’s earlier point that some author lived through fascist Italy, saying that this does not imply credibility, deducing that from OP’s supposed ignorance despite also living in a fascist state. I wouldn’t call it a good argument, but it’s not one that can’t be made as someone in the US.
How many games write their own 3D engine anymore
For streaming/discovery, custom cli application that scrapes Bandcamp ‘recommended’ albums to get associations between them and considers what I’ve liked and disliked for probability weights determining what to play next, playing them with mpv.
For actually downloading stuff I like enough to want to save, I have a dedicated button to take the url in my clipboard and save audio files from it to my music folder with a script that uses yt-dlp
Especially if there’s a phone attachment, something like this would be greatly improved with buttplug.io support
Interviewer: So tell me about why you think AI really will take jobs away from human beings at a significant scale.
Bill Gates: Yeah, so there’s no doubt to date, AI has created more jobs than it’s destroyed. The demand for the skill sets even just to build the data centers is very, very high. We have a, you know, a reasonably low unemployment rate.
The superiority of these systems is subject to a threshold where you have to believe that it’s incredibly reliable. And if you’re going to have your tele-sales or tele-support capability be AI-driven, you want to make sure that its accuracy is better than humans. And so the only profession we’ve truly crossed over that threshold is coding. And even there, I know a lot of people who are, you know, kind of stuck in the past and, you know, don’t want to use the AI for coding. But managers of coders get that most applications can be developed very inexpensively.
We will, in the next few years, cross over those thresholds for accounting, legal work, tele-sales, tele-support where 24 hours a day in every language with infinite trivia capability and no urgency, you know, so you look at the AI nurse and their several companies. They have perfect memory.
[Interviewer briefly clarifies something here, I removed this part because the autotranscription didn’t handle it well]
You know, you go to San Francisco and ask people, do you rather ride in a Waymo or rather ride with the human driver? Go ask people in the UK who use limbic for mental health support. You know, so the notion that just the market demand preference for driving or the nurse, you know, or even the person on the phone will favor humans. That’s a quality threshold which will be passed through, you know, if say insurance companies are still doing human claims, medical claims, which is a very AI-capable task, then a competitor who has very few human employees will come in and change the pricing model for that industry.
I think robot customer support will always suck because whatever it is you need from the company, they don’t actually want to bother with you. Don’t think I’ve ever made a phone call because I needed “trivia capability”. It won’t be good because they won’t give it access or authority to actually help anyone.
I had some bad luck with buying a SAS harddrive on ebay, bought like 3 in a row from different sellers that turned out to be DOA. To be fair, I was going for the lowest cost I could find for the capacity I wanted and ignoring seller reputation, and I did get full refunds after returning them, it was just a pain to keep installing broken harddrives, documenting how they were broken, repacking them and making trips to the post office. The fourth I bought used from Amazon for a little more money and that one worked, I noticed it was also packaged better, in its own harddrive shaped styrofoam thing instead of crammed in a small box with a thin layer of bubble wrap. The whole elapsed process took months. If I had to do it again I’d probably try more non-Amazon sellers again and try to find one that does packaging better and doesn’t try to sell broken shit because I hate Amazon but that is how it played out.
That’s your own addition though, it isn’t entirely clear that the person you questioned was talking about issues separate from its power structure.
Company policies aside
That’s kind of by far the most important class of problem though. I could complain about the complexity of its notifications system, or how all the ‘servers’ are represented with image icons and it sucks to navigate and find the one you’re thinking of if you add a lot of them, but it’s all small potatoes compared to being run by an enshittifying company complying (often in advance) with terrible laws and moving to use their accumulated leverage against their users. By developing a reliance on their service you put them in charge of you, but they cannot be trusted with that.
Now what?
I was very disappointed that the rest of this paragraph didn’t go in a completely different direction
Very cool OC
Well I’m not saying it’s the correct way, just, that’s why they wash them despite the drawbacks.
Because otherwise they have bits of poop on them
It does, some styles of rhetoric basically require a context of contentious argument, especially if they revolve around mockery/bullying and contempt for reasoned debate, so depriving them of your actual and apparent attention is the best you can do because it leaves them without anything to work with.