Yep, that's what I was getting at. Whenever I mention censorship-resistant file sharing tools on here, somebody comes along and says, "bah, those are useless, they're full of nazis and child molesters". It's an endless catch-22: if really bad people can't evade surveillance, neither can you. And if you can, then they can, too. When most people hit that realization, they say, "yeah, ok, whatever, 24/7 surveillance is fine as long as it catches bad people too."
> When most people hit that realization, they say ...
I have to say this is not my experience at all. In fact I can say I've probably never met anybody who came to that conclusion.
In my experience, most people recognize that, yes, bad people should be caught, but also that widespread surveillance and erosion of privacy is both bad for them and society. The problem arises with the fact that people often have more pressing matters to them - such as feeding their family - so they don't have time or energy to worry about fighting the myriad systemic issues that is needed to fix things on the necessary societal level.
I do not blame people for this, and nor should you; all that does is antagonize people and increases their reticence about politics in general.
> they say, "yeah, ok, whatever, 24/7 surveillance is fine as long as it catches bad people too."
So you should continue the discussion like this: those bad people after 24/7 surveillance have no other option to infiltrate the surveillance caste. That's where things will get really hellish.
It comes back to the argument: "Why are you opposed to this? Do you have something to hide?" It's easy to paint this as an easy way to catch pedophiles. It doesn't matter if this is actually true or if these arguments really hold up, by they are easy quips that can be thrown out that aren't easily dismissed with an as easy to reply quip.
Basically, the position comes down to: do you want to stop pedophiles, or do you want to make it easier for them to hide?
And yes, you can rationalize all day long about how that's not accurate and this and that, but then your arguing that most people are willing to sift through al the data instead of just going with something that at first glance seems reasonable.
Children's safety online has been an excuse for excessive surveillance for a long time. Not so long ago Apple was going to scan every file on your device for this reason.
I have llm very patiently explain to me why I crashed prod when I used the wrong conversion factor between ms and mus and us. Thanks SI very cool that one of the more often used units needs unicode to be entered into code.
Llm are absolutely helping with catching buts and code quality already.
Progress to where? One should not use "progress" as an unqualified
noun to denote a scalar. Progress is a vector, with both magnitude and
direction. The direction part is really important.
It projects the values of 2024 coastal America on the 17th century Switzerland of all places. A country so poor and desperate its only export was young men to be canon fodder.
There are developers who have breadth and developers who have depth. He is very much on the breadth end of the spectrum. It isn't lack of intelligence but lack of deep knowledge of esoteric fields you will use once a decade.
That said I find it a bit astonishing how little Ai he uses on his streams. I convert all the documentation I need into a rag system that I query stupid questions against.
No UK supermarket will guarantee their supply chain for prawns (shrimp) is slavery-free.
This in no way mitigates anybody else's issues, but that's an issue that I, personally, wish we could solve (and when we're done with that, maybe we can tackle the calorie laundering that goes on in that industry).
I think the problem is that in a globalised economy, a local issue quickly becomes an everybody issue. Am I less responsible, as a consumer, because the injury happens a long way away?
Of course, we are responsible most directly for our own interactions with other people. Less so with other people's bad behavior.
You go down the other road, there's an indirect connection to every person on earth. Refuse to deal with everybody and anybody because of that, you're paralyzed.
I get it, that was a rhetorical question. Mine is not a rhetorical answer. It's hard enough, dealing decently with the people I come into contact with. Struggling to make every problem into my problem, there's very little gain in that.
Before anybody says I'm callous and unfeeling, well, you'd have to know what I do in my own community. But few bother to weight that, at all, when they're playing the blamethrowing game.
'Just not eat prawns' is barely more than social action theatre. That's a point too. "I'm silently protesting something" is no protest at all. In fact, it is damaging the innocent for infinitesimal gain (the supply chain, the grocer, your own food variety).
You want to seize on a cause, go ahead. That would entail work, doing research, sending letters, something! That I could get behind; in fact, as I suggest, many of us are doing something every day. And maybe get a little weary of the warriors who respect gestures over substance.
Everyone hates the enough to justify anything up to and including public executions.