Ezra Klein being on the list is so fucking funny. Like, you telling me the “abundance” guy associates with the “techno monarchy” guy? Shocked I tell you, that the guy who’s proposed ideological concept basically just boiled down to “what if we deregulated stuff further to make economy good?” Is deeply tied to tech oligarchs.

Red hat isn’t a publicly traded company, but they are owned by a publicly traded company (IBM)

Going public just means that the shares will be traded on a public market (stock market) rather than being held privately. So anyone who wants to buy shares can. There are some legal requirements to be publicly traded, largely regarding public disclosure of finances and assets.

The major difference would be that suddenly anyone who wants to have a say in how they are run can buy shares, and if they buy enough shares, they can pressure leadership in to making decisions they would not have otherwise made. also, people buying the shares probably will want to see their shares increase in value, and thus leadership will be pressured to please the stock market hive mind. Potentially it opens them up to a hostile takeover where some outside group buys up enough shares to replaces the leadership with people they want in charge.

I’m constantly getting bot checked these days because I do a lot of stuff when casually browsing to prevent being fingerprinted and tracked between sites. I wonder how often they just mark anyone not making them selves easy to identify as a bot.

They’re only going public with 5% of the shares to constrain supply and push up price and thus total valuation. They’re also probably going to have to get rid of Xai as it is a dead weight on the company as a whole.

It’s going to be very messy and if people want anything to do with it, probably best to wait a bit longer and buy when it’s dropped substantially in value.

Roughly speaking a legal document stating what the author lets people do with their open source code. There are multiple types of license.

The core element is basically saying “I have released this code as opened source and anyone can use, no one else is allowed to claim it’s theirs and own it.”

Depending on the type of license there are often additional caveats. Like saying anyone who releases updated or altered versions have to release them under the same license or that people using it can not sell it.

at a certain point all you can do is laugh. Like, there is so much being left on the table, so many legitimately useful applications, but they only seem to care about chat bots and robots, because their conception of useful and powerful isn’t a better product, but how they can substitute capital expenditure for labor.

Managing people is hard, developing new products is hard, implementing new technology is hard. Selling vapor wear to other business? Easy. Taking in a bunch of investment on outlandish promises and then selling the company before you have to deliver? Easy. Making usage numbers go up by forcing something infront of users? Easy.

That’s what black block and IR dazzlers are for.

Sleep is important

in an era where many systems are always-on and suspend/resume working more reliably these days

… do people not turn their computers off when they’re done using them?

I think in the case of Utah it’s something beyond just wanting to spy on people. I think the LDS(Mormon) church legitimately wants to stamp out porn all together among it’s members. The first step to that is of course, getting a comprehensive list of everyone viewing porn, via ID collection. Then hand that list over to the LDS church, who can name and shame members they find on it.

Now, they probably will not be able do this everywhere, but, in Utah, it is absolutely with in their power given how much power it has over the state government.

“Solves 40% of customer issues”

Or, 40% of users give up after being stonewalled by a bot.

It’s not just Reddit, so many companies try and shunt you off a mobile web page and on to their app, despite many apps being little more than a pre loaded mobile web pages.

Why? Because users can modify how they interact with a web page, they can install extensions that modify how the code from the website is run, or just deny web pages access to some other process. There is very little a company can do about that, they have no control on how the user chooses to run the page. But… with an app, users can’t modify how the program is run. No plug ins, no web extensions, no choosing not to run some part of it, just the software as distributed by the company. Meaning full fat ads and complete access to any information the OS will let them have, way easier to make money on users that way.

Technically, it’s possible to alter any program, but it’s very hard if don’t have the source code, and it’s illegal to do so in many cases thanks to section 1201 of the DMCA, especially if you try and distribute that modification or tell others how to do it. Which is dumb, it’s your computer/phone, they shouldn’t get to tell you what code you can and can not run on it, they shouldn’t be able to force you to run code on it you don’t want to.

Same exact computer, they just don’t charge you for the windows license. So it’s a bit cheaper.

It is very private, by nature of it recording so little and leaving so little trace. Which is what was being asked about, not strictly speaking security.

Most distros don’t collect any data by default.

Basically any distro not built and maintained by a company will be a thousand times more private than Mac or windows. Arch and Debian are both good in that regard, most distros are derived from those. There is also Fedora which is a community project, but it’s very heavily involved with Red Hat inc who is owned by IBM. I’ve never heard about any privacy issues there, but, it’s worth keeping in mind.

If you want something super secure and locked down in regards to privacy, there is Tails which has a lot of neat tricks and tor built in. Not sure I’d recommend it as a daily driver but it’s got it’s use cases.

*75% of code was written by people who were required to have an AI plug in installed.

Probably also having their usage tracked.

Also have had their work loads increased and their deadlines shortened.

And if they don’t hit the metrics and meet the shorter deadlines… they get fired.

I’m sure that’s a recipe for functional, well tested, efficient, and secure software. Definitely not creating a shit ton of technical debt.

Can’t wait for Schleswig-Holstein and France to fight distro proxy wars.

“It’s here right now and definitely working and producing productivity and revenue, but also we need to cut costs so we can keep spending money on it. Hmmm? Why not use the revenue it’s generating to pay for it, well, you see, we’re just scailing so fast it’s not enough. Oh, why not fund it with credit? The banks won’t let us put up the nvidia chips as collateral to buy more nvidia chips anymore.”

So spraying Windows with the assistant, regardless of how users felt about it, was somehow an accident?

Probably more that internal politics at the company lead a bunch of project leads to try implementing it. If leadership keeps emphasizing how important AI is, and people who have “done stuff with AI” keep getting promoted, then of course people are going to shove it anywhere they can, and of course the higher ups will approve it. It’s classic group/cult think in a hierarchical system.