Right but Al Capone did jail time, here Zuck gets to break and enter into people's homes, take their stuff, then haggle for it after-the-fact, all the while keeping the civilization-domination apparatus that he built using the stuff he stole? That is super not fair. Ordinary people could certainly not get away with that.
The US justice system doesn't start from fair. It starts from what you can prove to the letter of the law.
And when you're targeting someone / something with unlimited lawyers, you'd better have ironclad evidence that exactly that happened in exactly the way the claim is written.
Okay, sure, but I'm talking about being satisfied. I understand reality and that I may not get the satisfaction I would like. And specifically the example of Al Capone who was, yeah, got for tax evasion, but at least was treated ultimately like the criminal he was.
I mean, he was sentenced to 11 years and served 7 1/2.
But untreated (at the time, no penicillin) syphilis turned him into a mental pre-teen after his release, so I guess the universe serves some justice where the laws of the land do not.
Okay but... I am very unimpressed by this. How is it that he then gets to still be an AI monopolist/hegemonist? How's that fair? He basically force-acquired all this stuff without asking, now he's haggling for it later. Where are the criminal charges? Where is the deprivement of, if not freedom, then equity assets.
How unique are our problems? They have utilities, airlines, etc in India. Everything you'd talk to a support agent with is basically the same globally, and if not, can easily be explained to a person who hasn't been living in a yurt and burning yak dung for fuel; and tbh I think you could explain return processes to those folks as well.
I’ve spent time in India, and while they have many of the same things, they sometimes operate very differently. I assume call centers don’t pay that much, so it’s very possible that while India has certain things, the people I’m talking to have limited access.
If I’m trying to convey an issue about a flight, per your example, it may very well be to someone who’s never flown or has very different expectations for what it looks like to fly. At one of the airports I was at in India, I was trying to find my gate and was pointed to a guy at a card table with a 3-ring binder, where he flipped through to find the flight. This was maybe 10 years ago; I had never experienced anything like that in the US, even going back several decades. This is a cultural and experiential difference. If someone from that airport in India called me for help (prior to that experience), I would have had an really hard time parsing their problem, as I wouldn’t have any context for seeing a man with a binder about finding gate information. Someone saying that wouldn’t have made any sense to me. Other airports there were more akin to what I’m used to in the US, but still had their local quirks.
This same type of issue could play out regardless of the country. India was the example brought up, but I’ve run into confusion due to cultural differences everywhere I’ve been to some degree. How impactful this is to support will vary based on how common the issue is, but I’m usually not calling support for common issues now that most of those can be handled via a website.
Right but it's not like they don't know about flying and can't be instructed and coached? I don't mean to me dismissive, maybe (quite possibly) things are more complicated than that, but ...? Like, okay when an Indian person is working for an Indian airline they're instructed "hey, here's the departures binder." But when they're hired by Lufthansa they get oriented using whatever system and processes are in place at that company. And "hey, don't be rude. To western people, here's what that means beyond what's intuitive to you." How does their previous experience with a binder mean they can't relate to you on a support call?
Spent the last year building a customer-facing AI agent for a Miami law firm with operations in Colombia. The accent question never came up in the build. The knowledge question came up constantly.
Half the inbound clients were Colombian families navigating US immigration. The agent had to know which apostilled documents the Cancillería typically processes in 3 days vs 3 weeks, that "documento de identidad" in Colombia is the cédula not the DNI, that the consulate in Bogotá closes early on Fridays. None of that is in any LLM's pretraining; we hand-built and update the knowledge files monthly.
Your binder-table-at-the-airport story is the deeper one. AI can fake the voice. It can't fake the lived experience. Cheaper to invest in the knowledge files than in the accent layer.
it all depends on their training. And with the churn i imagine they are getting, or the cost measures, it's usually not quite the same.
And yes, cultural difference matters. Americans often have more agency to take initiative, on average. Knowing there's an American on the other side puts me at ease, mentally.
What is there to say except everyone is different and to each their own! I can't imagine wanting to listen to Phish for extended periods of time, muchless while working. But it's beautiful that someone else might. I am sorry for your loss original poster.
Nothing I recall from my 30's, but in my 20's I worked in videogames and that was a brutal industry at that time in terms of work-life balance. (Or, at least it sounds better nowadays.)
Bad sleep habits at that time ultimately led me to do a lot of daytime napping.
During those sessions I occasionally experienced sleep paralysis, one out of body waking dream, and disturbing stuff like hearing head-splitting trumpet sounds upon waking up.
One time, I awoke and heard an attenuated trumpet sound, and through the rush I heard two voices nearby. Just as I finished struggling to get control of my body, I distinctly remember hearing one of them say, "I can see it!"
I was living alone at the time, and that was so alarming and made me question my life choices. Looking back now I view that episode as a probable spiritual attack on a vulnerable young man.
> I awoke and heard an attenuated trumpet sound, and through the rush I heard two voices nearby. Just as I finished struggling to get control of my body, I distinctly remember hearing one of them say, "I can see it!"
Sounds like the Geoff Day scene in Infinite Jest ... the sound resonance of a window fan and a violin opens a portal and something Lovecraftian comes through: "a small part of the wing of something far too large to be seen in totality."
Actually, I do remember one episode in my late 30's. My wife had twins. They were born extremely premature and there was a good chance they'd both die as we were at the extreme end of the survivability chart at that time - like by a single day of gestation and with one less day we were in the "recommend do not resuscitate" zone. Most compressed time of anguish I've ever experienced, stunned me for years. Both boys' bodies are growing good now, veeery quirky minds though.
Anyhow, studies had shown that preemies could benefit from just laying with the parents skin to skin, called "kangaroo care". So, I got to experience that with both boys one or two times! Wow, that was really something. I couldn't hold them or touch with my hands, just have them be laid on my bare chest. Very special to just love on them and feel them squirm around there a bit.
I thought, ok, I'm going to give them a little well wishing because the kid I was given was in the worst shape healthwise between the two. I closed my eyes, and concentrated on baby. I said mentally, "heal". "If you can take away anything from me that helps, do it! You have to grow and take food!" And I probed mentally.
Suddenly, I had a visual hallucination. It was a projected 3D scene of reverse images to the color of light coming through my eyelids. I could see some sort of movement of blobs rotating out, coming back. If they got too far outside my field of view they would fade and disappear. There was something like 3 visible blobs, a stationary one and two smaller moving ones. It was like I was seeing autonomic or mental processes in baby, visualized.
So I just loved on him for a bit and sat with that experience. And then I thought, maybe I can see my own processes if this is really happening to me? So, I said in my mind, "Show me what I look like". And the view changed!
What I saw was mostly out of my field of view, so many things were faded, but the blobs I could see were cycling in all different directions including away and back towards me and at different speeds. It was like a factory scene compared to my son's machine shop. I told him to take from that scene whatever would help, and the session ended soon after.
When I kangaroo cared with my other son I tried to repeat this experience and well wish him and communicate mentally, but I could not connect. That made me sad and secretly a little worried about this one's health, but I could not tell anyone my feelings because it was so odd what I had experienced with baby A. And was it just nerves and all my own imagination? Maybe, but it felt real.
I had a similar experience (seeing blobs) where in my sleep I saw my baby boy conceived. A few days later my wife took a pregnancy test and it came back negative, I was majorly let down as I had this vision and strong feeling there was a baby.
A week later my wife misses her period and she is pregnant. It turns out my vision is more accurate than the 99% accurate pregnancy test.
The voices sounded human, like hushed. I can't say in my case.
In Christianity, Satan and demons are recognized as a reality. God allows them access to humanity. That doesn't make God evil, and in fact God uses evil forces to drive people to Him. And we are given the choice to go with whatever party we choose, so the whole experiment hinges on choice. I know that the prince of Earth, Satan, isn't sporting; of course he preys on the vulnerable and the weak first. That was one of the low points in life for me when I heard the voices and when I had no faith.
It's nice that it gives you comfort but it still boggles my mind how all of this gets rationalized.
I also get that it's a personal relationship, but it troubles me because that mindset allows for an incredible amount of damaging behavior for society as a whole. What's worse is that this relationship becomes part of one's self-identity, so that any critique of that worldview is received as a personal attack rather than a philosophical debate.
Just philosophically speaking, an accidental entropic universe eventually producing Labubus doesn't work either.
History, law, civilization, anti-slavery and the dignity of man all come from judeo-christian teaching, it's not just comfort/assurance. You just gotta be careful who you follow, there's loads of shysters and crummy humans in religion just like everywhere else as you are probably aware.
Church is supposed to be about community, but it never really was for me. I didn't put in enough effort. I still go for the kids.
What hooked me was Bible Study Fellowship[1] where I got a real education in the Bible. That gave me a community where I have a men's group and they know me and we meet weekly and they give good advice and support when things turn sour.
If you want to understand the architecture of the world, check it out. Next year they're doing Romans, holy shit, that one goes deep. Maybe you're searching, and that's a safe place to simply learn.
I painfully recognize the value of community offered, as well as a sense of purpose. There's plenty of good things to be had from it. But just as opiates can remove pain and make one "feel good", they have serious risks as well. Marx's comment to this effect is spot on.
We are experiencing a battle of religious fundamentalism and anti-intellectualism that impacts us all. This is why I understand and respect the personal relationship bits, but I fear the fanatics who think their beliefs should be applied to all.
My take on those fanatics is that they are fucking insane and dangerous. The foundation that they rest upon is approved of and validated by the "non crazy, good religious people".
My fear is valid: there are millions of my fellow citizens who would have no concern if I was "terminated" as I am an unbeliever. I wish this was hyperbole and would love to be proven wrong.
The current Secretary of War believes that the actions in Iran are divine and subscribes to the notion of Armageddon as a good thing and is in the position to make that happen. Thus, I find your faith to not be as benign as you do.
edit: I need to emphasize that there's no personal enmity intended in my comment, it's a fear and frustration with the outcome of faith itself.
No offense taken, I see you are wrestling with the idea of faith. The way I look at it, God doesn't just meet you where you are, he pursues. So, if you are meant to surrender, it's a good thing. That just means you were one that didn't get away. Question everything, but don't fight it unnecessarily.
On the other stuff, I will only observe that war is not a human thing. It's too organized, requires inhuman (evil) top down control. Iran is a detestable war just like every other war.
But, there is also the unlimited psychological warfare being waged everywhere now that affects us more directly.
You saw Hegeseth doing a disgusting Deus Vult routine, but I guarantee you the majority of people are tuned out and missed that entirely. (So they get away with it.)
In my opinion, that was another targeted demoralization psyop intended to wound and stun people like us, and for different reasons. It is so far outside the acceptable narrative frame that it cranks everyone up who is paying attention, makes them bewildered and furious and that drowns out other news stories they want everyone to miss.
It is all "fake and ghey", as the kids like to say. How do I know? They're all actors reading scripts, Hegeseth especially. Right out of central casting as Trump says.
What is really happening is a complete toss up. The greatest casualty in war is the truth.
I have no solutions to offer. Just please don't take your frustrations out on normie Christians, even if you think they're misguided, they have no power.
I worry when the rhetoric gets angry and scared. Fear and disgust can lead to atrocities. Who stands to gain when we fight? Who capitalizes every time a lefty shooter pops off? I'd prefer you challenge the rage bait narrative, roll your eyes at how outlandish it all sounds, and become more cynical than scared.
Other insane/outlandish psyops meant to stun and confuse:
* The Charlie Kirk memorial
* Everything that comes out of Stephen Miller's mouth
I'm actually not wrestling at all with faith -- my point is that I understand the attraction and how in individual contexts it can be benign, but as a whole is the foundation of incredibly dangerous outcomes.
I appreciate your recognition of ugliness that can come out when it is wielded as a weapon, but it's still in the context of "you're holding it wrong".
> war is not a human thing
Au contraire, mon frere. It's been part of humanity the whole time (and we recently learned about chimpanzees doing the same thing. And here you illustrate a facet of my concern: ascribing horrible behavior to some supernatural entities rather than the the reality of human psychology and power dynamics.
People disrupt Manhattan for novelty (eg. marathon) and civic/political (eg. no car zones) purposes all the time. Manhattan is hardly a purely reasonable place, in fact it's far from it. All kinds of nonsense takes place in nyc all the time. If nyc was driven by cold economic reason it would be boring and lame compared to what it is today.
> People disrupt Manhattan for novelty (eg. marathon) and civic/political (eg. no car zones) purposes all the time
This isn’t in the same category as burying a new train line. I lived around just the Hudson Yard water and electric expansions when those happened. It was years of increased noise, traffic and litigation.
> it didn't seem to cause the city to collapse into itself
Straw man. Nobody claimed these were existential threats.
OP said "I wouldn't be surprised if cost/passenger over useful lifetime still shakes out better for the trains." I'm saying I wouldn't be surprised if the opposite came out–take the costs of the disruption and time value of money into account, and building a new train line anywhere in Manhattan is a worse use of resources than (a) increasing capacity on existing lines, a veritable forest of low-hanging fruit or even (b) eVTOLs.
Strawman: yes, but the point stands in its milder form that noise etc isn't substantial economic disruptive.
But yeah the reality is that no one is going to be digging in NY substantially soon/ever because if you look at precedent that's been the case for the last 100 years. And building a tunnel to JFK would be huge
Op's example was underground. Moses built above ground, thereby requiring the ruthlessness. Not sure the same ruthlessness would be needed with tunnels.
According to Bloomberg[1] construction of the first phase of the second avenue subway cost about 2.5B USD per mile.
At that rate, even if you just look at extending the A/C/E from Jamaica to JFK, you're talking about 15B or so USD. And compared to today's [subway|LIRR] -> airtrain system, you probably only cut about 25% of the travel time (from 60 minutes down to 45 minutes)
Compare that to, for example, the Gateway Tunnel, estimated to cost about 16B USD and double the daily commuter capacity from NJ to NYC (including traffic to and from EWR!), and it's hard to justify new infrastructure to make it easier to get to the airport.
> Not sure the same ruthlessness would be needed with tunnels
Still requires lots of cut and cover due to buried power and water mains being poorly documented. And stations will require razing buildings, as well as gentrifying neighborhoods.
I remember being in 5th grade and hearing about the Human Genome Project. It was presented as a radical undertaking. 30 years later, look how far we've come. Just the other day I was reading about the UK Biobank leaks (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47875843), and it was mentioned that some large number of complete human genomes were leaking out. And I thought wow, back in the day people thought Craig Venter was out there.
The title of this article should be "Rust can't stop you from not giving a fuck" or "Rust can't give a fuck for you."
---
> What’s notable is that all of these bugs landed in a production Rust codebase, written by people who knew what they were doing
...
[List of bugs a diligent person would be mindful of, unix expert or not]
---
Only conclusion I can make is, unfortunately, the people writing these tools are not good software developers, certainly not sufficiently good for this line of work.
For comparison, I am neither a unix neckbeard nor a rust expert, but with the magic of LLMs I am using rust to write a music player. The amount of tokens I've sunk into watching for undesirable panics or dropped errors is pretty substantial. Why? Because I don't want my music player to suck! Simple as that. If you don't think about panics or errors, your software is going to be erratic, unpredictable and confusing.
Now, coreutils isn't my hobby music player, it's fundamental Internet infrastructure! I hate sounding like a Breitbart commenter but it is quite shocking to see the lack of basic thought going into writing what is meant to be critical infrastructure. Wow, honestly pathetic. Sorry to be so negative and for this word choice, but "shock" and "disappointment" are mild terms here for me.
Anyway, thanks for the author of this post! This is a red flag that should be distributed far and wide.
> Pretty shocking to see the lack of basic thought going into writing what is meant to be critical infrastructure
uutils did not start off as "let's make critical infrastructure in Rust", it started off as "coreutils are small and have tests, so we're rewriting them in Rust for fun". As a result there's needed to be a bunch of cleanup work.
Okay, thanks for the context, but aren't distributions eager to adopt these? Are current GNU coreutils a common vulnerability vector?
> For fun
My idea of fun is reviewing my code and making sure I'm handling errors correctly so that my software doesn't suck. Maybe the people who are doing this, for fun, should be more aligned with that mentality?
So yeah, their implementation of chmod checked if a path was pointing to the root of the filesystem with 'if file == Path::new("/")'.
How the f** did this sub-amateur slop end up in a big-name linux distribution? We've de-professionalized software engineering to such a degree that people don't even know what baseline competent software looks like anymore
I love Rust, but I wonder if this is an example of the idea that its excellent type system can lull some people into a false sense of security. Particularly when interfacing to low-level code like kernel APIs, which are basically minefields inadvertently designed to trick the unwary, the Rust guarantees are undermined. The extent of this may not be immediately obvious to everyone.
This seems to be the case, yes. Before reading this post I was a lot more open minded about the "rewrite it in Rust" scene but now I'm just kind of in a horrorpit wondering whether I'll be stuck on macOS forever :(.
I don't think that is the case. I think the people that wrote this are simply bad programmers. Some of these issues are so obvious that if you've been doing any amount of programming, you should be able to anticipate them, whether you're writing C, Rust, or Java.
Creative but implausible excuse. MacOS is a better OS for consumers than Windows. But if you're a developer or other technical person, nothing stops you from using Linux today.
Right but coming from macOS, how do I know that the Linux distro I pick doesn't have this god-forsaken stuff in it? Before this thread I didn't know Canonical was so... busted. What else do I not know? With macOS, I think I can be sure that this kind of stuff won't be in the core shell commands :).
When I do `man builtin` on macOS now, I get:
```
HISTORY
The builtin manual page first appeared in FreeBSD 3.4.
```
which is what I expected, and I don't expect those to be pulled out from under me and replaced with the sort of nonsense we have here today.
reply