That there is no perfect defense. There is no protection. Being alive means being exposed; it’s the nature of life to be hazardous—it’s the stuff of living.
Nothing what you wrote contradicts my original OP.
You using crypto to buy your toilet paper is not a mass scale use case and it is irrelevant.
You can of course be pedantic and say, well I buy toilet paper with crypto therefore what you’re saying is wrong.
Way to go man!
It’s fascinating how you assume that anyone who has a critical outlook on crypto has no clue what they are talking about.
Although it is to be expected for crypto promoters (see my OP about crypto being used either for criminal activities or for dump bags on the next mark).
Don’t be stupid. If the government wants to get your crypto, they will.
It’s all a matter of whether they see the effort as being worth it.
Totally, your top up example is so relevant! It’s a major part of economic activity!
The true killer use case for crypto!
That’s the point. You can send people a transaction via a bank account and they won’t know how much you have.
This who privacy thing is a roleplay thing for you.
You debasing the notion of privacy and government spying if you think your toilet paper purchases are relevant in the context of this discussion.
This is not a serious example in terms of scale and market share.
My point stands.
Ridiculous example.
This is not an issue for any transaction. When I send my friend money from my bank account, they don’t know how much is on it.
Do you have any evidence to back this up?
It’s reasonable to assume that the vast majority of their throughput is used for crime.
The overwhelming majority of people do not leverage crypto in any way. Even crypto scam promoters almost exclusively focus on speculation and do not use crypto as money.
And you do not need the payment for your order of bell peppers and toilet paper to be private. Let’s be real here.
Over the 15+ years that we’ve had crypto, there have been only two viable uses. All others have failed:
The irony with all these oligarch statements is that if an employee applies their economic philosophy in a direct manner, the outcome would be that the employees’ sole goal should be to work as little as possible to gain as much money as possible while not getting fired.
You want to optimize your return per hour if you are salaried. It would make logical sense that you need to lower the amount of hours worked to get the highest possible return on a per hour basis.
You would also want to focus on approaches that make it difficult to fire you as opposed to focusing on organizational goals.
I am not saying I agree or disagree with this approach, there are clearly many issues with what I am saying (other poor souls will have to pick up the slack for your laziness), just highlighting the inherent contradictions of oligarch propaganda.
Blockchain Capital
Did not know they got money from a crypto firm.
I never joined Bluesky because I don’t trust any commercial US-based social networks. The American VC culture is hopelessly corrupt.
Investment from some crypto criminals is the cherry on top.
Would be curious to read the LLM output.
I find after reading a selection of LLM generated poetry/short fiction, you start notice signs of a generated text. It tends to be a bit too polished, without any idiosyncrasies and with almost too much consistency in the delivery.
EDIT: So I read the short story. To be honest, I am don’t think I would be able to tell whether this was LLM generated or written by a writer. There are some subtle signs, but it’s very much possible that I am seeing these signs because I knew it was LLM generated.
One thing to point out is that this is not really a short story, it’s less than a thousand words with honestly not much going on and there is lots of colourful descriptive text. I was expecting something in the range of 3K to 5K words.
After reading the “short story”, I am not sure I agree with the methodology. Some of their test statements include “I was interested in the struggles of these characters” and “This story deserved to be published in a top literary journal”. The story is not long enough enough to make meaningful conclusions about such test statements.
Their approach to willingness to pay also doesn’t make sense as it’s too short. Here is their graph for the TWP metic:
This seems artificial, no one is going to pay 30 cents in a real world scenario for such a text (irrespective of whether you think it was written by a person or if it was LLM generated). The respondents might rate it at being worth 30 or 40 cents as part of the survey, but that’s not the same thing as actually going through with a purchase. I will note they didn’t simply ask for a value and they did have a system tied to the survey payout; but this almost seems irrelevant.
Definitely, US courts lack institutional maturity for such cases.
There are presidents with war criminals in some African countries being tried in international court system due to challenges with local courts systems.
I was refering to Kaplan specifically. Considering his background it seems a bit strange, but unfortunately very much believable. :(
Some of the most telling anecdotes in Careless People involve Kaplan, who joined Facebook’s policy team in 2011 and was promoted to Chief Global Affairs Officer earlier this year. She writes that Kaplan, who was a deputy chief of staff in the George W. Bush White House, was “surprised to learn Taiwan is an island” and that “often when we start to talk about pressing issues in some country in Latin America or Asia, he stops and asks me to explain where the country is.”
This almost seems difficult to believe, but considering the state of the world, I wouldn’t be surprised if it is true.
By now, Meta’s failures in Myanmar, where hate speech and misinformation on Facebook helped incite a genocide, are well documented. Wynn-Williams, who early in her tenure flew to Myanmar to try to sell officials there on the company’s connectivity projects, describes her futile attempts to get more resources for content moderation in the country.
She blames Kaplan in particular. She says she “started this long process of trying to hire someone for Myanmar in 2015” and found a human rights expert who fit the bill in May 2016, but Kaplan blocked her from making the hire in February of 2017. He allegedly told her to “move on and get over it.” She later concludes that “when it came to Myanmar, those people just didn’t matter to him.”
In a just world, Kaplan and Zuckerberg would be required to do mandatory multi-decade community service work as live-in junior janitors at major Rohingya refugee camps in Bangladesh. For example, in Bhasan Char island.
Yeah, this seems to be an example of anthropomorphication of tech that so commonly used to keep the AI grift going.
P.S. I actively use many ML solutions (local LLM, ML video upscaling), the tech clearly has potential, but that doesn’t mean I have to take a naive view of the actions of corrupt American oligarch groups (MS is a massive monopoly that has extracted untold billions from consumers with their anti-competitive behaviour).
That’s not good. Revenge / doxxing on this scale should be followed up on.
That’s why you immediately assumed I had no clue how a blockchain works and you went with an extremely condescending response about a “teachable moment”.
You bagholders are all the same!