Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
Posts 5
Comments 645
A TL;DR of the Goldman-Sachs AI Criticism
  • And this is it: Many of those "AI will be so smart that it can solve these problems for us!" arguments refer to problems where having a "smart" enough solution isn't the problem... Getting people to care/notice/participate/get out of the way is.

  • Tesla Cybertruck gets vandalized by climate activists
  • And no, no one really uses this or an ICE truck in a way that would require them to have one. Even people who haul shit in the back would usually do with a more sensible roofed vehicle, but that would be less "cool".

    Wait, no one has a legitimate use case for a truck? Like transporting building materials and tools? Large furniture and appliances? People who live along an unpaved mountain road, or work somewhere similarly remote, like forestry? Towing fifth-wheel trailers? When it snows here, I'm stuck at home until someone with a truck comes by to plow... They have large dedicated snowplows for the highways and stuff, but for out-of-the-way residential streets, the city contracts private pickup truck owners with their own plows. I'm glad they're around.

    Like don't get me wrong-- The majority of truck owners pretty much never do these things, and it's an extremely wasteful vanity display for them. That's bad. Most people who buy Cybertrucks will not be doing truck stuff with them. That's bad too.

    But I think some people have a good reason to own a truck.

  • Google and Microsoft consume more power than some countries
  • If your efficiency function is centered around revenue, then yeah, of course... No surprise that one of the world's most successful for-profit companies generates more profit per watt-hour than a nation, which encompasses all sorts of non-revenue-generating activity like running hospitals and keeping street lights on.

  • Linguistics in science
  • I think what annoys me most about "the "sonic hedgehog" example is that it has nothing to do with sound.

    There are two wolves in my heart: A meme wolf, and a pedant wolf. Today they fight, and I know not which will win.

  • Is there a reason that mobile devices are considered more "trusted" than desktop/laptops?

    I keep interacting with systems-- like my bank, etc.-- that require (or allow) you to add one or more trusted devices, which facilitate authentication in a variety of ways.

    Some services let you set any device as a trusted device-- Macbook, desktop, phone, tablet, whatever. But many-- again, like my bank-- only allow you to trust a mobile device. Login confirmation is on a mobile device. Transaction confirmation: mobile device. Change a setting: Believe it or not, confirm on mobile device.

    That kind of makes sense in that confirming on a second device is more secure... That's one way to implement MFA. But of course, the inverse is not true: If I'm using the mobile app, there's no need to confirm my transactions on desktop or any other second device, and in fact, I'm not allowed to.

    But... Personally, I trust my mobile device much less than my desktop. I feel like I'm more likely to lose it or have it compromised in some way, and I feel like I have less visibility and control into what's running on it and how it's secured. I still think it's fairly trustworthy, but just not categorically better than my Macbook.

    So maybe I'm missing something: Is there some reason that an Android/iOS device would be inherently more secure than a laptop? Is it laziness on the part of (e.g.) my bank? Or is something else driving this phenomenon?

    Buying a home in the US has never been this hard
  • "Solving the crisis ... requires the private and non-profit sectors to join forces with the public authorities at all levels of government."

    So as long as everybody coordinates toward the same common goal, we should be okay.

    ...Welp, we had a good run.

  • Customer service
  • Or just plug in a regular laptop when you want to watch something. That's my move.

    On top of crap hardware, "smart" TVs are a pretty serious security vulnerability, too. Better to not have it on the same network as your primary devices.

  • Ubisoft meme
  • Well... That's like alot of steps, lol. In UX design, we would call that a violation of the Three Click rule, and obfuscating the expression of user intent.

    Like... Do you gain anything from these launchers? I guess Frosty you opt into because you use it to manage your mods. Maybe launching through that is how your mods get bootstrapped. Kay cool.

    Epic games, you definitely need and want to use for other reasons-- Shopping for games and managing your library-- but is it really benefitting you to open that app so that you can open the app you actually want to use? Maybe you have a reason that you actually like that better, idk, but I'd rather just open the app that I want.

    And then the EA app... What does it offer that makes it worth putting another step between you and your game? Login to the EA account you don't need? DRM? Ads for other games? The premise of most launchers is that the company has some goals that you don't share, and they're willing to add friction to your experience to achieve those.

    Some launchers aren't so bad. I dunno what EA's deal is. Speaking of Ubisoft Connect specifically:

    • It's an online-only service that forces you into having an account to play... It's not just an extra launcher in front of your game
    • Ubisoft Connect is part of their DRM mechanism
    • It wants admin privileges on your system
    • It leaves processes running in the background when you aren't using it
    • And more

    Those things aren't necessarily all bad per se, and you'd certainly tolerate them for some apps... But it's a big imposition for the company to insist on, IMO, and part of the reason for the launcher hate.

    I didn't downvote btw, I think you're entitled to your opinion and maybe you're fine with the launchers you use... But personally, I just choose not to play Ubisoft games for that reason, even though there are games that I would like to have played.

  • Who would you recommend opening a bank account with in 2024?

    I'm planning to open a new chequing account in the near future, and I'm contemplating bailing on RBC. I've been with them for a very long time, and one possible outcome is that I'll just open a new RBC account and be done with it. That'd be... fine.

    But for a variety of reasons (including my satisfaction with RBC trending steadily downward), I'm thinking about opening this new account elsewhere. I don't have a ton of hard requirements, and I'm not really sure what to look for in a bank, but the following would be nice:

    • Good online banking experience, particularly desktop (RBC is shockingly bad at this)
    • Good credit card; easy to make payments from the new account
    • Minimal fees
    • Easy e-transfers
    • Real security (another thing RBC is terrible at)
    • Neat rewards would be cool
    • Low-fee, low-friction investing would also be cool-- I don't really do much investing, but I'd like to be able to

    Any suggestions would be great, including anti-suggestions if you happen to know of a bank that I should avoid.


    "Managers are the real architects," concludes manager

    For reference (as per Wikipedia):

    > Any organization that designs a system (defined broadly) will produce a design whose structure is a copy of the organization's communication structure. > > — Melvin E. Conway

    Imagine interpreting that as advice on how you should try to design things, lol.

    Tbf, I think most of the post is just typical LinkedIn fluff, but I didn't want to take the poor fellow out of context.