Someone tried to kill you?! People actually killed your friends? Not sure if schizophrenia or actual story ... I desperately need to hear more of this story.
> Someone tried to kill you?! People actually killed your friends? Not sure if schizophrenia or actual story ... I desperately need to hear more of this story.
There's no way to prove or disprove it, therefore replying to your comment is pointless. If you think someone stays dead-silent for 5 years and that this is schizophrenic behavior, you are way too easily gullible. Either way, your comment was done with malicious intent.
I don't think they're being malicious. It is definitely a normal reaction to respond with incredulity at something incredible.
As in, someone was actually killed because their friend forked an open source project? There is clearly more to the story, it's not like if I forked Audacity tomorrow people would be after me immediately.
The explanation, if any, involves the whole thing being very public and 4chan harassment, etc.
If the attackers did limit themselves to a small number of Asian machines they gave up an absolute goldmine. I would venture to say a lot of technical people use notepad++ at work in jobs that would be very lucrative for an attacker to exploit. I know I definitely had an 'oh shit' moment when I read this and thought about where I have notepad++ installed.
I am just fine with people tagging their art and their craft with causes they believe in. The person behind the work is part of the work. If you didn't pay for it or contribute sweat equity you don't get to decide otherwise. Your only recourse is to not use it.
Choosing not to engage politically is not a neutral action. Life is politics. The world is full of people that are trying to control your life in a thousand different ways. Choosing to not engage in support or opposition to that control doesn't mean you aren't participating, it means your default position is letting them do what they want.
Is choosing to set certain parts of one’s life apart from politics equivalent to “choosing not to engage politically?” If so then shouldn’t every action that you take be imbued with politics, including the choice of how long you brush your teeth and when, where, and how you sleep? Or are certain things exempt from the rule, but not posting on HN? If that’s the case, why does posting on HN require political engagement but not, say, your interactions with the clerk at the grocery store? Are those of us who fail to inform every person we meet about our political views choosing not to engage politically? Even if we dedicate a certain portion of our lives to political engagement?
Edit: I’ll also add that political messaging is highly contextual. What is appropriate and effective in one place may be counterproductive or actively harmful elsewhere. Format and tone actually matter if you care about your pet cause succeeding, believe it or not.
I think this is a good example you provide about the store clerk at the grocery store, and I think you can expand this even further. Sometimes when I go to a store and am checking out they will ask me to donate to some random charity. Whether or not I care about the cause they are asking for money for doesn't matter at all in that moment. It annoys me and I don't want it to be asked in that interactions as that's not what I'm there for and not what I care to be put on the spot to think about.
I view these kinds of weird virtue signaling political statements on things like software to be the same. They do absolutely nothing and are just visual noise for nothing. Actually, this is a good example of where it can go wrong as it likely made the software the target of Chinese state-sponsored actors. So not only does it serve no useful purpose, it also can make you a target and piss people off.
I do not think it is uncommon for someone to do this, then see the side they oppose win more in elections, public perception, etc then decide to engage more and that is "why is there political messaging literally everywhere".
Since we can't remove it, the next best alternative is to participate and advocate for responsible political engagement. I think until we have some shared understanding of what responsible political engagement is we will continue to have it everywhere.
the original commenter has explicitly stated willingness to engage politically , he has also stated this is not something he is willing to do when it is interrupting his seperate personal choices , concluding with an observation that others tend to conflate non-constant political will with a constant apolitical view. can you please explain how you are not conflating these two concepts ?
You sound just delightful. A wonderful blend of ignorant and weird-but-not-in-the-good-way. Smoking anything is bad for you, including the thing you like. PM 2.5 contamination is enormously harmful, and it doesn't magically go away if it's weed.
The kind of people who are easily distracted like this are the kind of people that will be very unlikely to configure an application filter for each task. What would be immensely more useful would be a (local) AI that periodically looks at your screen, uses context clues to figure out what you're doing, and first uses social pressure to get you on track, and eventually just closes it if you keep getting distracted.
Putting the ones on the user to manage this is just adding one additional thing that requires executive function.
This is just about the worst possible response it seems. It manages to probably hurt some wrists not used to long handwriting sessions, completely avoid learning how to use and attribute AI responsibly, and still probably just results in kids handwriting AI generated slop, anyway.
It also disadvantages people with disabilities. How exactly are they supposed to do these papers and tests? Dictate everything to someone else, using Blindness as an example? Because that seems very very inefficient and extremely error-prone.
As someone with an actual visual impairment, please do not attempt to use my affliction to justify generalized use of AI. Educational assistance for those with disabilities is not a new thing; AI is likely going to have a role but how remains exactly to be seen.
As someone who myself is legally blind, I am in no way justifying the use of AI like this. I was responding to the entire "let's all go back to actual paper-based tests/assignments" trope that was being trotted out on here. Sure, it (might) work, but it also disadvantages people like us, since most teachers can't read braille (at least, none of mine could).
So, your whole point boils down to 'do it in person', so what's the point of handwriting it then? The whole handwriting thing is performative in either case, it's pointless. Why not specify that it be written in cuniform?
We've been writing with our hands for thousands of years. I suspect that on balance a Butlerian Jihad against AI slop would be perfectly fine for our hands.
I don't think parent post is claiming that Google is using other people's networks to scrape the web only that they have a strong incentive to keep other players from doing that.
No, there are other scrapers that Google doesn't block or interact with. You can even run scraping from GCP. This has nothing to do with "only Google is allowed to scrape".
They even host apps which exist for scraping data, like https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sociallead...
So what. If we allowed posts from only the most enlightened programmers whose elegant architectural energy allows them to hover 6 inches off the ground HN would be empty.
Yes, grifters latching onto the newest technology to sell snake oil is a brand new phenomenon and definitely not literally a fundamental part of new technology.
reply