Singapore executes transit travellers with personal amounts of drugs and men with long hair. Not my picture of freedom, no matter what their economy is doing.
A ban from the 60s refused entry to hippies, it fell out of use and was removed from the books early in the 1990s.
At no point in time were Led Zeppelin, the Bee Gees, Cliff Richard, Kitarō or other long haired men transiting Singapore during that period (1960-1990) executed.
Like the USofA, freedom in Singapore is f(wealth).
Legally, justice wise, it's still rooted in English common law from it's time as a colony prior to the British getting over run by Japanese on bicycles.
Even its class bigotry is rooted in colonial British attitudes.
It's wild watching people damn them for being authoritarian, yet by various polls 77% of Singapore want the death penalty for drug traffickers. This is high enough that i.e. in USA it would definitely be popular enough to pass an amendment to civil rights to guarantee execution even if the freedom from jeopardy to death penalty had been prior enshrined.
When "authoritarianism" used to secure economic freedom, "authoritarianism" bad. When authoritarianism used to stop the majority from executing drug traffickers, authoritarianism ... good?
Which polls? Political elections? Professional polls from experts? Or some random poll on the streets from some TV-Station or influencer? People also answer very different depending on the prospected outcome, thus the "seriousness" of their answer.
> This is high enough that i.e. in USA it would definitely be popular enough to pass an amendment to civil rights to guarantee execution even if the freedom from jeopardy to death penalty had been prior enshrined.
And legal system in Singapore works like USA? This seems like a strange claim.
Of course not. But show me a good system where 23% minority of the people can define civil rights in contradiction to the 77% and you will be better off, because that's the only way you can answer my prior question with inconsistencies presented.
Sure. It's any system where the 77% want something really bad, and the 23% don't. For example, a system where 77% of people want drug traffickers executed and 23% don't. That's a system where listening to the 23% is better than listening to the 77%.
A system like this cannot remain stable, and because it's unstable, it is not good.
Why is Europe being outdone by authoritarian racists? Singapore started out as a little shithole in the corner of Malaysia, nothing particularly special to start from and a long ways from any rich country to trade with, maybe you can learn something from the racists.
1.) Someone complains about racism in Europe. In this regard Singapore is not an alternative.
2.) Sure European countries can learn something from Singapore or China. But definitely not on topics like racism and freedom of press.
3.) Was Singapore a shithole place giving its location? I doubt it because it started as a harbour where location matters. On the other hand Singapore government was quiet capable. So very interwined topic and longer discussion is needed.
I feel like this is an artifact from the late 2010s when the talk was of removing the port completely from phones, where that was being touted alongside swapping speakers with haptic screen audio as a way to make them completely waterproof.
As wireless charging never quite reached the level hoped – see AirPower – and Google/Apple seemingly bought and never did anything with a bunch of haptic audio startups, I figure that idea died....but they never cared enough to make sure the USB port remained top end.
I'd usually be against losing ports and user serviceable stuff but if the device could actually be properly sealed up (ie no speakers, mics, charge ports, etc) that would be legitimately useful.
They are running on individuals machines who can give them access to any number of "tools" which allow them to do things other than just writing words.
Consciousness isn't a requirement for potentially dangerous behavior. When the science fiction the probabilistic models are trained on tend towards "AI uprising" and you give them the tools to do it, the probability machines will play out that scenario especially if they are prompted by their humans in that direction which some people will undoubtedly do for kicks.
If some people will give their bots crypto currency and the bots could buy hosting to "escape" or run scams to make more money or pool resources or any number of harmful things.
I'm not arguing any sort of agency here. I completely agree there is no consciousness nor do I believe there ever will be but that's not a precondition at all for an untethered probabilistic machine to be harmful.
We’ve seen many times that platforms can be popular and widely disliked at the same time. Facebook is a clear example.
The difference there is it became hated after it was established and financially successful. If you need to turn free visitors in to paying customers, that general mood of “AI is bad and going to make me lose my job/fuck up society” is yet another hurdle OpenAI will have to overcome.
Yeah, every single big website is totally free. People have complex emotions toward Facebook, Instagram and TikTok, but they don't have to pull out their wallet. That's a bridge too far for many people.
Mmm, as someone forced to write a lot of last minute demos for a startup right out of school that ended up raising ~100MM, there's a fair bit of wiggle room in "Functional".
Not that I would excuse Cursor if they're fudging this either - My opinion is that a large part of the growing skepticism and general disillusionment that permeates among engineers in the industry (ex - the jokes about exiting tech to be a farmer or carpenter, or things like https://imgur.com/6wbgy2L) comes from seeing first hand that being misleading, abusive, or outright lying are often rewarded quite well, and it's not a particularly new phenomenon.
The worst of them are literal mockups of a feature in the same vein as figma... a screenshot with a hotzone that when clicked shows another screenshot that implies a thing was done, when no such thing was done.
I don't think it's really targeted at building apps, as far as I can tell its whole pitch has always been that that most websites are not apps and therefore most websites do not need a full JS framework like Next.js.
They even say it in this blog:
"Our mission to design a web framework specifically for building websites — what we call content-driven websites, to better distinguish from data-driven, stateful web applications — resonated"
I mean yeah they will have to show it if they’re buying booze, cigs, or getting a discounted travel ticket. But I don’t think that’s unreasonable, and “conditioning” feels overly dramatic.
They aren't getting a discounted travel ticket, they're getting free bus travel in return for carrying around a photo ID all the time. (I don't agree with fourteen and fifteen year olds being able to travel on the bus for free at ten or eleven at night on Friday or Saturday and getting up to no good on the public coin. It was sold to the public as a school bus replacement and/or reducing car use. It is an obvious attempt to normalise ID cards.)
I wish they would fix the bug that has plagued testing against Safari for larger applications since day 1: the silent memory restart. At the very least give an error indicating why the page just refreshed so users/testers can report it, but it would honestly be best to just let a modern desktop browser use the available memory if desired.
This is probably the single most frustrating issue on iOS Safari, and the Reddit website triggers it all the time.
It would be nice if Reddit wasn't a total hog that could barely load two separate pages without crashing from a memory leak, or allow you to navigate without breaking the back button completely, but it'd also be nice if Safari was more resilient to it.
reply