TBF small businesses do this too on average. There’s some that don’t, but then there’s also some that straight up do crime, usually against employees.

To solve this, you either want a well-regulated market, or no market (however that would work).

Or maybe just refuses to fathom that other people could not want to talk to him. If he has a psych file I’m sure it’s darkly fascinating.

Yeah, but some people are more willing to move onto a smaller platform. Like us. In practice, as long as more than one person becomes willing per person who makes the change, it works out to compounding percentage growth, which is good because the internet itself would never have taken off otherwise (or cities and railways, for that matter).

Pretty much. My impression is that there’s a lot of “how” in the things today’s CCP does, but not nearly enough “why”.

They’ve invented a digital point system to discourage private talk about bad news. That’s very impressive and innovative from an organisational point of view. It’s just put towards a very questionable goal, not only morally but also practically.

Eventually that contradiction is bound to catch up with them.

I’d be more surprised if Trump didn’t get weird nuke ideas fairly shortly after getting access, actually.

You guys 'member agar.com? /s

I mean, that’s what it would have to be, right? OP probably thinks it’s impossible because GAI is impossible. I think it’s likely impossible because there’s no moral system that’s both totally specific and which we could all agree on, even roughly.

Either way, a good guy detector is far off at the very least, and we’re going to have to struggle for the cause of good, whatever that may be, the old fashioned political way.

but I feel there will never be a technology that can do that.

That’s my best guess too, but someone could plausibly argue otherwise. I just went with something undisputable that still illustrates the main point.

Shocking. /s

No current technology can distinguish between good guys and bad guys. There’s like a pervasive ideological discomfort with that basic fact. You see it again and again on every regulation debate.

that you need to get conspiracy theorists to sit down and do the treatment. With their general level of paranoia around a) tech, b) science, and c) manipulation, that not likely to happen.

You overestimate how hard it is to get a conspiracy theorist to click on something. I don’t know, it seems promising to me. I more worry that it can be used to sell things more nefarious than “climate change is real”.

you need a level of “AI” that isn’t going to start hallucinating and instead enforce the subjects’ conspiracy beliefs. Despite techbros’ hype of the technology, I’m not convinced we’re anywhere close.

They used a purpose-finetuned GPT-4 model for this study, and it didn’t go off script in that way once. I bet you could make it if you really tried, but if you’re doing adversarial prompting then you’re not the target for this thing anyway.

The interaction between society and technology continues to be borderline impossible to predict. I hope less true factually beliefs are still harder to defend, at least.

If it’s outside Russia, sure. It’s probably going to be something (or some things) in international space if it’s a retaliation for something in international space. Or at least, it should be, because I don’t really buy the “direct war with Russia would be fine” jerk.

Yeah, I don’t get that. Federation is the option to have a hyper-custom server that does weird things, or to make your own server with blackjack and hookers if you don’t like your current one, without losing access to community and content. Most people aren’t nerds, though, so if you want plag-and-play an instance like lemmy.world is great.

If you want a small bubble you actually don’t want federation.

Mastodon is just an impenetrable mess from a UX perspective.

How does it compare to Lemmy?

Great, so the perverse incentives aren’t beatable then. Time to bug lawmakers, I guess?

On the bright side, Lemmy feels just about like Reddit to use, so that bodes well for us.

Okay, so I’m going to tell you where the new Twitter is in the blue swirly.

I know, I know, easier said than done to actually guide them through, but if they’re at that level it’s just a different setting on the magic box.

Yeah, I feel like this should be surmountable. At worst, you skip the whole concept of federation and just tell them exactly where to sign up.

But still yes, once NATO works out which Russian stuff to take out in response.

Probably the ghost tankers, right?

I feel like the “tits” they would get for that “tat” would be pretty bad for them. NATO breaks toys better than they ever will.

I don’t really think it would start WWIII on it’s own, though.

Ooooooohhh! I never made that connection.