brendyn

Can I call thia "cargo cult wallet finding", any actual correct usage of "cargo cult"?

Unfortunately guix currently has banned LLM contributions. Its not set in stone but the developers intent to maintain a human based hacker environment. Nothing wrong with carving out ones own subculture of course! There may be a sizable enough community interested in employing LLM usage to get together and create a dedicated channel for packages developed with them, or make a soft fork.

That being said, having worked on guix packages. Automated conversation is not so simple. The bottleneck for me is compilation time and cost. even with superdooper intelligence, you have to trial and error builds, fix mysterious test race conditions and match versions.

A powerful $5000 build server plus another several thousand per year for The electricity cost would go a long way to speeding up this process. Old second hand computers are not viable because the electricity cost for constantly building software on them is not cost effective.

It makes me kinda buthurt when some racist rich people can raise millions for some crappy arch skin distro soft fork, but serious, novel, from the ground up projects have to scratch around in the dirt for pennies. The project may not have truly demonstrated it's worth to justify replacing nix, but I feel it's unique and special enough that it is deserving of some money falling from the sky. It's 1 of only 2 of this style of functional packaging distribution.

Search on desktop thunderbird sucks too. I wanted to find an email with file://foo/bar, but it ignored the non latin characters and still couldn't find it. I gave up and grepped the mbox archive instead.

I think there are certain things good people ought to do to combat brain rot and malicious actors that they don't do because they feel too icky for a good person to do. Like using a some basic baysian filter trained for sanity. You just take the 160 people that upvote some garbage and penalize them. The internet is too hostile for passive pure hearted systems to survive.

Sometimes when I find someone to look up to and admire, I later find out there is potentially some dark reality to them. I then lament not being able to find any good role models in the world. If they have missused donor money, then that is terrible. If they are pushing towards goals that seems contrary to their stated mission, that is difficult to judge. I did always find it odd, 10 years after reading Yudkowsky's passionate writings, that he doesn't seem to have really gone and done anything about it. If it was all just a creative writing exercise to him... Then that would be rather humiliating to me, having taken it very seriously.

As a side note. If I had a choice to oppose a booming ai comoany, or become the billionaire founder of it, I would still choose to become the founder and then use my resource to do something about. It certainly feels hypocritical, but if you want to stop a boulder rolling down hill, what can you do besides run ahead of it and try stop it?

When people talk about solving a game like go or chess, they mean proving mathematically if there exists a way to guarantee a win, or if the second player can always guarantee a draw, among related questions. Current game engines have no such knowledge, they just pick statistically what the think the best move is and hope for the best.

People aren't property. Hong Kong belongs to Hong Kong people. If you ask a typical Chinese people to explain why Hong Kong or Taiwan belong to China, they will never at any point consider the will of the born and raised there. They will instead blabber on about history how they used to belong to "them", where the delusion of identity leads them to believe something of the past once belonging to someone else, now belongs to them because of this arbitrary "us" and "china". They have no capacity to consider the living breathing humans alive in the current era and attempt to derive from first principles what is best for everyone.

Apologies for political commentary, but I just say this in drew defaults blog:

“ Daniel Berntsson

Known for: Mullvad VPN (co-founder, co-owner)

Daniel is the co-founder of Mullvad VPN, alongside Fredrik Strömberg. In June 2026, Daniel donated 5M Swedish Krona (~$500,000 USD) to the populist anti-immigration Örebro Party,[source] saying “it’s sad that it’s needed”. The party supports the ethnic cleansing of non-white people from Sweden, and Daniel’s donation represented, at the time, 72% of the party’s revenue. Daniel cited immigration as a motivating factor for his donation.”

I'm confused. Shouldn't you conclude it's unethical /not/ to support safety research based off your own points.

My understanding of "safety" is that it means formalising morality, ensuring AI doesn't go astray as it recursively improves it's self, destroying our future in some horrifying way possibly worse than death.

I was curious about this claim "... that any coverage of a woman’s appearance, even flattering coverage, diminishes voter perception of her competence. "

So I skimmed the linked oxford academy article. I can't see where it supports this exactly l, although it does match my intuition...

Did they also compare perceived competency of men that receive relatively more commentary on their appearance?

It also occurs to me that one reason a person, regardless of gender, may have a higher ratio of commentary on their appearance rather than policy, is because they are in fact less competent, giving the media less meaningful content to discuss.

Just to be clear, I'm not dismissing the discrimination women face daily or stating a conclusion, I just didn't see where it was proven here.

Stop doing it then. Often we see the logical conclusion to something, but then our brains just shrug it off and chooses ignorance. I think it is necessary at this point to find emotionally stimulating content such as videos of slaughterhouses not following regulation, this can help us come to terms with what we already know.

Maybe because it was mistaken. I just set my grapheneos to a 35 character password to test it and it didnt seem to have any issue.

To any commenters, please link me to any great resources (documentaries/videos/books) that you feel best demonstrates the advanced intelligence and awareness of other species. I know people that think "fish only have 7 seconds of memory" and wish to share this knowledge.

I restrict myself to eating vegetarian + things like oysters, abalone. But I'm guilty and have been eating fish. The bigger the fish, the more guilty and apprehensive I feel about the fish having some degree of qualia. Probably its fine eating Sardines with their tiny brains? As you may have surmised, it's a philosophical topic I'm very uncertain about.

People are often perplexed, saying that since everything dies anyway, it doesn't matter. But it's not about death, it's about how it lived it's life in a slaughterhouse or whatever. of course, life out in the wild is brutal too, so many animals that end up on the dinner table probably lived better lives than they would have in the wild. But, as my empathy and compassion grows to encompass other animals, even if the meat on the table is "ethical" by my own judgement, I find myself awkwardly thinking to myself "uhh, maybe ill just eat the damn tofu instead".