Analemma_

How about you find an example instead of assuming.

Right, but the flipside is that a lot of people also go "look how much money they're making, they couldn't possibly go bust". Whole lotta people said that about Mt. Gox, FTX, Gemini, etc. Making a ton of money doesn't prevent you from doing dumb things with it and having no liquidity when the reaper comes.

I keep saying this: don't bother trying to dunk on crypto people with accusations like this. To a first approximation, nobody in crypto actually believes in the stated principles of anti-centralization, freedom, etc. It's entirely about number go up and always has been. Your charge of hypocrisy just bounces straight off people who never cared about the politics.

I don't really care about the motivation? Malware is malware.

The thing is, in a democracy (actually in any form of government, but especially a democracy) I don't think you can cleanly separate those two things. When a sufficiently-large segment of the public decides X is a problem, then X is a problem, period. Even if X is objectively, truthfully, not a problem. And you can sit back and be satisfied that you have proven X is not a problem, but who cares? Your proof does not by itself affect the material state of the world one bit, where X will continue to be a problem.

> I can't take these objections seriously.

Well, once there are enough of these objections, you are forced to take them seriously whether you "can" or not, because they have the power to stop the party into which so much capital and valuations are tied up.

Or to put it another way, I can't take vaccine objectors seriously, but now there are enough of them that I don't have any choice. For better or worse, that's how democracy works.

The lack of a config GUI in ghostty used to bother me, but to be honest now I just describe to Claude what I want to change and it does it. It would still be nice to have one eventually but I can see the argument for deprioritizing it.

Amazon offers good signing bonuses that pay out over two years, so it's very common to peace out right at the 2-year mark when your take-home pay abruptly goes way down and the grind is no longer worth it. That's what I did, and I noticed it almost everywhere: there's a constant revolving door of inexperienced people. I don't understand how they keep it going with so much turnover, but somehow they've built a system that kinda withstands it, except in frontier AI apparently.

YouTube has a moat a mile wide and ten thousand feet deep because their product is insanely expensive to provide. Think about it: they let you upload a basically-unlimited amount of video and then they store it for you forever, for free.

Every competitor which has tried to do this has been eaten alive by the costs of bandwidth and storage, even if they have a deep-pocketed corporate backer (e.g. Twitch will not let you store unlimited VODs like YouTube will). Some companies have managed to flank YouTube and carve out a little niche like short-form video, but I think building an actual YouTube competitor with the features people demand (again, unlimited uploads and eternal storage, for free) is more-or-less impossible.

I think their quasi-public status means that contracts of carriage should be tightly hemmed in by law and not have as many degrees of freedom as ordinary contracts, but they are still contracts regarding the use of private property, and in the absence of such hemming, the terms and conditions still apply.

If you want to launch a public campaign to change the law and add "you can always surreptitiously record people on airlines" to the set of unenforceable contract terms, go ahead and attempt it. You'll deserve the furious blowback you get, though.

> I think planes are public places

They literally aren't, though. They are the airline's private property, and you've entered into a contract of carriage with them to temporarily have access to their property under the terms of the contract. To some extent these terms are circumscribed by law, but in the absence such law, you are bound by whatever terms you agreed to in the contract. If you don't agree not to film in the plane, you're free to not accept the contract.

> I hope the irony isn't lost on these companies.

"Companies" are not capable of feeling irony. They absolutely will demand the unfettered right to scrape your stuff while demanding that your scrapers be outlawed at the same time, and if you go "hey, that's hypocritical of you", you won't get any response, not even a half-hearted rebuttal or uncaring shrug. Taking about "hypocrisy" or "philosophical consistency" with regard to corporate behavior is almost a category error, these aren't concepts which even exist in that space.

I'm not as optimistic. I think we're in a very small golden window and once companies catch on that reverse engineering is taking off in a big way, they're going to panic and start demanding cryptographically-sealed binaries with remote attestation everywhere. And they'll probably get it, because what the consumer wants barely matters anymore.