strbean

A lot of agricultural water use is wildly inefficient, and a lot of that inefficiency is attributable to subsidization of water prices.

The embargo was enforced. This slightly mitigates scenarios where someone accidentally sends a document via email while it is under embargo.

Anthropic and others already have "AI-powered wet labs". Not sure to what extent they are able to automate lab operations. I recall seeing a post about specifically running automated in-vitro experiments controlled by agents, though. I don't think it's being sidestepped, I think it is being handled. Or at least they are trying; maybe the labs operate at a "Theranos-spraying-blood-everywhere" level.

> A standard that also covers the n-word.

What an absurd thing to say. This honestly gives the impression that you aren't arguing in good faith. If you don't see the difference between these:

- a word that was used universally in the pejorative against one of the most gruesomely marginalized groups of people in human history, and has been reclaimed by that marginalized group but outside of it is still universally pejorative

- a word that has never been predominantly used pejoratively, being applied to a group that isn't in any sense marginalized, and in fact when used pejoratively is almost always applied to a privileged group (people gentrifying communities due to their higher relative income)

... I don't see how anyone could possibly have a productive discussion of this with you.

> Migrants are migrants. Anti-immigration sentiment restricted to domestic immigration alone is nor specifically more acceptable than that for foreigners.

This is patently false. Domestic migration in the US, outside of the basic physical challenges, carries almost zero extra hardship, legal challenges, etc. No domestic migrant* is getting their legal status in San Francisco revoked and being deported to the Congo. Nobody has ever rounded up the midwesterners in New York City and put them in internment camps. The last time there was significant mob violence against domestic migrants was in the reconstruction era against so-called carpet baggers, and that situation had a lot of additional baggage (they had just lost a war to these people).

Can you not see the difference between being punching up and punching down?

transplant isn't inherently pejorative. People who move cities will frequently refer to themselves by this moniker.

I've always literally never heard it used to refer to someone who migrated from another country. Only someone who moved domestically.

> My introduction to programming as a kid was also writing Runescape bots

4th for that! Although screen scraping always infuriated me, so I spent most of my time writing bots for decompiled RS clients.

I missed out on this drama, is there an article digging into it somewhere?

From what I remember, it was more like Slack on crack, with tree-style nesting, and tons of integration so you could do something like create a document and collaboratively edit it within a chat.

Wow, thank you for the warning!

Any chance you could give me detail on what went wrong?

> Somebody hacked into that pilates studio, and it wasn't an inanimate object, because that is just silly.

I don't agree with this premise.

If a bit flip creates a worm, is God hacking the affected computers? Why can't an inanimate object hack a computer?

There's a big difference in the advertised functionality of the two tools.

A closer analogy would be if you turned on your blinker and your car autonomously decided to shoot the card in your blind spot with a rocket.

The name "AI Assistant" not only does not indicate that it will spontaneously break the law to break into other computer systems, it also carries some implied liability. It claims to replace a real life assistant, who in fact would be liable for breaking the law in carrying out their tasks (unless it could be argued that you implied they should break the law when giving them the task).

The poster I initially replied to at least failed to acknowledge that it may be the tool itself malfunctioning, and therefore the liability of the AI company. The implication of their post was that it is always the end user who should be liable.

I think analyzing and understanding bad people (or, let's say, people who are consistently harmful to those around them?) is valuable.

I don't think seeking to involve those people in your life is. It would be interesting to ask an oracle what percentage of people have managed to "change" an abusive partner after pursuing them knowing full well the red flags they display. I'd wager it is a tiny percentage though.

How is this different than testing an idea with a janky, rushed, handcoded protype or MVP? That's how a lot of product development has always been done.

> or their redeeming qualities

I can't stand this. Most people who suck aren't an onion. They just suck. Or there is a nice layer under that, and then beneath that a core of suck.