smeej

I think a lot of people don't want or care about major traction. They want to make little things that make their own little corners of the world better.

There are small towns all over the world which could realistically have their own little "hometown app" now, that really does track all the interesting things going on there. People don't need "The (Unofficial) Smallville Happenings" Facebook pages anymore. These don't all have some programmer who cares enough about building such a thing to make it happen, but they probably do have a teenager or even a retiree who would have a lot of fun making something that really works well for the people of that town and how they want to use it. The barrier to entry just became low enough to get over.

And that's just one example. There are SO MANY problems that used to require mega investment to solve at scale to get any traction at all. Now communities can build them for themselves. And they'll never be the kind of data target that a megacorp is, because you'd have to target each little app individually, hoping there was something useful in there.

The democratization of software development is going to have lots of things that go nowhere, and lots of little hobby projects, and a few things people will actually hear about and care about. But a lot of people's lives will become incrementally better and I'm excited to see that.

I'm looking forward to the making of more software. I think there are probably people who have had really useful software ideas for a long time that they'd never be able to raise money for, but now for $20 a month, they can get up and running, serving their local and/or niche communities, without having to hire a team of engineers.

Eventually we're going to reach a point where they don't have to understand the code themselves. The democratization of software creation is going to be fascinating.

I think there might be a small handful of humans whose visage is so distinctive they can definitely know (or more importantly, prove) an AI image is of them and not a doppelganger. I can't imagine winning this case.

Do you have your image source available somewhere? I'm not going to build this same thing, but I'd love to add some prints of birds to my shelves and, not knowing much about birds, it would help to have a set of pictures I could look through and go, "Ooh! This one!" and learn about them. It'd be a good jumping on point!

I would say the answer is "obviously not," to the degree that it's hard totake your question in good faith.

The China-made goods have been sold. Ownership transfers at sale. It would be ludicrous for some Chinese agency to say, "Well, we made it, so even though you bought it from us, it's actually still ours. Surprise!"

Sure it does. It shapes your impression based on your perception of Anthropic.

"Made in China" on items for sale in China is a positive indicator. "Made in China" on items for sale in the U.S. is a negative one.

The line between "attribution" and "marketing" seems to depend on your impression of the entity involved.

I would very deliberately avoid a mystery novel or a prayer book if it said "Co-authored by Claude" because I don't want to see a world in which those things are generated by entities other than humans.

I don't have that same objection when it comes to computer code.

But the important point is that your impression of either one depends on your prior position on Claude. What do you assume when you see that attribution?

I don't really understand what makes this different from companies stamping "Made in China" on products that were made in China.

The line between "advertisement" and "attribution" seems to depend upon your impression of the entity taking the attribution.

It wouldn't be easy, but I'm imagining it would probably require identifying the other side of some historical transactions, and being able to prove that. Like if you had ever sent to/from any other address you held the key to, you could sign a transaction from that other address.

There's still some small part of me hoping that the later waves are whitehats and the reason they're keeping everything in segmented addresses is because they hope to find a way to return the funds.

I had CDs from all my high school friends' dumb little bands. All gone.

I don't care that nobody else on YouTube would ever have wanted to hear them. I don't even really care that the band members themselves would probably be embarrassed that I still had a copy. The point of buying the disk (and uploading it in the first place) was so that I word continue to have access to it.

I lost my entire local indie music collection. I'm glad your interests were apparently more mainstream, but I can't listen to my high school classmates' songs ever again.

I trusted it in 2008 because none of these things had been around long enough to have a track record of enshittification.

Yeah, but if the songs in your Google Music library weren't on YouTube Music, you just lost them forever. End of story.

It was the betrayal that turned me off Google.