woodpanel

hehe, sorry not a native speaker, but I should have seen that.

It’s all fair and square for a Tech CEO to be thinking like that. Morally despicable but totally expected.

It is an entirely different ballgame of idiocy to write something like

> that’s looser thinking

In response to one of his employees in a company wide slack chat. How stupid and unaware of yourself and your surroundings do you have to be?

Put aside that this may even be a legal case in itself, what does this say about his leadership in general?

> Privatize the losses

Isn't that what the IPOs are for?

a) How courageous for them declaring wanting to ban something that isn't being proposed

b) if an AI bubble burst were to happen, the fallout would be severe, ie. hard to abstain for policy makers from giving the public ease of mind

c) All this proposal wants is to drive a wrench between the GOP and its new (?) populist voters, that don't want any favors given to any Big Tech oligarchs, regardless of it being AI or not.

d) this may work or not – neither party is going to abstain from bailing them out, anyways.

Because some people have to have their opinions on things be reaffirmed by how it maps to coordinates on the cultural battle map.

Today being anti-h1b is deemed racist although no other than Bernie Sanders was outspoken against it for decades until very recently. Never mind.

Never mind that some people deemed anti Covid measures racist (ie hugged people in Chinatown for PR stunts, or licking handles in public transit for online clout) and unscientific (masks are bad) until Trump did a 180 (ie. masks are mandatory now). Or how many ppl said they would never have the „trump-vax“ injected and yet after Trump lost the election 2019 were gluttonous about the restrictions to be implemented against the unvaxxed.

Freedom of speech for me, censorship for thee.

Playing obvious problems of Brazil‘s judiciary system down like that are clear red flags for somebody not for 1 sec contemplating how he would react if the political camps would be reversed in this situation. It is their sovereignty if the censorship happens on speech you don’t like

Sleeping giants is one of the most shadiest anti-democratic organizations that, once you grasp what they are actually doing, there’s literally nothing else left to do for voters than what you described. Its subversive unethical manipulation (there are offshoots in Europe as well) is a reason for me to go scorched earth and auto-inverse: anybody that’s not distancing himself from them is unelectable, anybody who promises to put them on a chopping block gets my vote.

> Gender-neutral variant of man-in-the-middle

Countless and countless, no, millions of male developers felt discriminated against whenever someone called it Man-in-the-middle. This went on unaccounted for for decades! Finally we’re being seen!

Not to mention all the women who were misogynisticly attacked by assuming women can’t be hackers.

Finally justice. It’s very important that we’re getting our priorities right when talking about security vulnerabilities!

Absolutely. In Germany even a female sports teacher can't enter a girls locker room – unless she has provable fear for the health / security of one of her sutdents. Ie. screams of pain.

There is this elite ideology that produces rules like this, circles thinking of themselves as being progressive and socially concious. It is exactly the opposite: Kids from the bottom ranks of society are often in dire need of any feedback loop from society, as most often their own family does nothing or even worse promotes bad behaviour. Often a judge is the first person that gives them an honest assessment in their lives.

Of course the question is then why we need judges - or teachers - to fill out that role in the first place, but that is for another day.

But the fact is that in Germany physical attacks on teachers are now a daily occurance at most urban public schools, which in the long run will undermine the whole school system even more by parents voting by foot and moving their kids to private schools.

Fast forward a couple of decades and you get Paris-levels of private schooling market share (ie. > 40%) with the "socially concious" and "progressive" riots as a result.

As the pro-COVID-measures-crowd largely overlaps with the Putler-crowd it’s going to be interesting to see their agenda re-alignment.

When the wuhan Lab leak happened in 2019 most of my direct and indirect mainland china contacts were more or less 100% sure that this was intentionally leaked by the regime, and even if it wasn’t, that the regime is going to milk it internally (vs dissent) and externally (vs the west). Especially given that this happened just a few months after the Hong Kong protest crackdowns.

The western center-left didn’t want to acknowledge any of this until it became politically feasible for their own gain and this alone cost us roughly the first three months of properly responding.

Let’s see if and how they’ll going to put their political shenanigans before their countrymen this time. I fear, with all the division they sewed it is almost certainly going lure them to double down on “Covidiots”.

> guessing games

that still doesn't answer why to choose MCPs over Skills.

I happen to be much more token efficient by

- installing a cli tool

- exposing it via a simple SKILL.md

- turn repetitive patterns into bash scripts fast

I noticed the security aspect to be one of the main selling points in corporations for going MCP (and one aspect that is underrepresented here).

However, maybe I'm missing something but how is defining access rights in an application layer the agent has access to more secure than defining the access rights at the target application itself?

Sure, hiding the filesystem via encapsulation tricks is one way to go. But what is the real-world usage-style of this vs. all MCP usages? I'd wager 1-10% are spending this extra effort, while 90% of users basically run shims so that they can expose APIs to their LLMs, for which they have no/bad access rights management.

Immediate Tab-Closing when the author can't finish even half of an CSS article without ranting about evil conservatives ("far-right racist infamy").

Agree. Add to that that usually those ideological metrics have some telling blindspots.

In the case of their white paper, while being very thorough in defining which workers should be deducted from the workforce bucket, they have no adjustment towards when someone should be eligible for this triage in the first place.

Students for example.

Who studies out of virtue, and who just because the job market is still closed off to him?

Specifically urban governments used this statistical trick to downplay youth-unemployment for decades while also benefiting themselves with providing employment for their political base. Funnily though, these social-worker-slash-educator jobs are often themselves not viable enough to make it into the „true“ workforce bucket