CodingJeebus

It's pretty easy to see where that ends. The headline writes itself: "Github engineers arrested for betting on downtime on prediction markets and intentionally causing outages"

Unless you have more money than you know what to do with, I don't understand the use case for agentic e-commerce. Things like Apple Pay feel like the right abstraction, removing the need for manual input of the basics while tying the actual transaction to an intentional signal. Manually typing in a credit card over and over again isn't fun, but that's been solved without needing to give up all power of purchases.

There's nothing I want to turn over to an agent so badly to buy for me that I'm willing to give up manual auth. And based on these numbers, I'm definitely not alone in thinking that way.

Maybe for people who have the means to afford LLMs, but then who really wants that? That's a hard pass for me and I use LLMs every day. I suspect that asking society to trust in a digital middle-man between themselves and their money will be a very hard sell.

Of course not. But he wouldn't need to do that if she is a honeypot. Remember, this guy was photographed while autographing a woman's chest like a rockstar just a couple years ago. Combined with the leather jacket look, he gives off a vibe of an executive that likes to party.

I broadly understand this as the utopian vision of what crypto could theoretically be, but it's not playing out this way in the real world and I have a hard time seeing it ever succeeding this way.

Being able to leverage crypto on this scale requires everyone to either A) be technical enough to understand and use smart contracts directly or B) delegate a party that handles this for you. This is where the utopian case usually falls apart, because most people are B and this requires trusting a third party, which kinda defeats the entire point of the vision.

Because most people don't want to do the work of learning and managing crypto directly, a huge industry flourished to service these people, full of its own interests, corruption and various levels of criminality. And well-intentioned crypto people have no way to reign this industry in because the entire point is to operate in a deregulated way.

Ironically, the piece that makes crypto fundamentally unworkable 20 years in is capitalism.

If she is an asset and was close enough to gain physical access to his phone or main computer, that's pretty much the ballgame. CEOs often don't want their devices being on company MDMs, that's for the underlings.

I've been delivery-app-free for several years, with the lone exception being when I'm sick and contagious. Restaurant food with delivery basically costs double where I live, and grocery delivery has always been hit-or-miss on the quality of things like produce.

Freak what you feel but delivery apps are just not worth it for me personally outside of those necessary contexts and I don't mind the inconvenience of picking up my own food.

To be fair, food quality standards in the US have lagged places like Europe for many years. This is certainly not a new problem.

I'm pretty excited to be able to test mobile app gestures directly in Xcode on the Mac, should make for a better developer experience.

The concern with this is that it gives any company/government/etc. latitude to plant paid protestors or bot traffic in order to undermine opposition with greater efficacy in the AI era. Intelligence agencies have understood this tactic for many years.

I've had this exact experience a few times now on Reddit where I see a viral video and people point out that it's AI, and I don't always realize it right away. It's just not worth consuming content anymore that I don't feel confident about the provenance of.

So much of the front page was ragebait before AI, but ragebait that could be AI-generated is a hard nope for me.

But how does a true AI ban actually look in practice? The open weight models are out there, the hardware is out there. Spamming is already illegal but so commonplace that it's pretty laughably enforced at this point. Even really heinous stuff in the dark corners of the web still finds its way into the hands of users, I don't see how AI is any different in this regard.

True, but there are some key differences between this and Uber.

One is that an Uber rider is never put on a list of "can't ever ride on other services again", whereas if you try to sell a house that has unlicensed plumbing or electrical work done, it will show up on inspection and any smart buyer will walk (or run) away. Tons of real estate deals fall through because the seller did shoddy work like this and it will demonstrably reduce the value of your property because it's only worth what people are willing to pay.

This is also true for when you want an actual contractor to come work on your house. If a licensed contractor sees that you're trying to fix unlicensed work, they too will run away because they don't want to inherit the liability. I think the very red-tape nature of contracting work will be one of the things that protects it from this idiocy.

Doing unlicensed plumbing or electrical work is a crime where I live. Not that a law necessarily stops everyone (that problem already exists today), but I genuinely have a hard time seeing how companies get states to relax these kinds of laws because they exist for good reason. It doesn't surprise me to see companies try to make inroads here, but it's an uphill battle I think.

When I was a kid, a landlord in my community decided to "fix" a broken heating unit at one of his properties himself to save money, and wound up killing all of his tenants due to CO poisoning. Those are the kinds of situations that we are risking by enabling DIY contract work.