It still has plenty of active users (myself included) but it feels much smaller than the 2010s. The groups are great if you can find ones that match your taste, and it’s way more fun to do that and share you photos with human-curated communities than with the algorithmic feed.
I genuinely don’t understand AI people anymore. Like the cognitive gap is so huge that I feel like I’m from another planet now. Im not religious, but automating religion is so absolutely meaningless that it boggles my mind. You could have a machine emit million of prayers up to heaven per second, but why would you?
And despite what you think, most of us can tell apart AI generated content from the genuine thing. I am, however, starting to believe AI bros are being sincere when they tell us that they can’t. Every time someone gives me that tired “well how do you know we’re not just stochastic parrots too!” crap, I’m getting a little closer to taking their word for it. Maybe they are just that.
I used to worry that the problem was that LLMs allowed you to be stupid, but I recently realized the actual problem is that they reward you for being stupid.
It’s all well and good for you if you want to be a consumer of political content when it suits you, but for a creator, the creation’s whole purpose may be a delivery mechanism for their message which may otherwise go unheard. Not saying this is necessarily what Don Ho (Notepad++) is doing, but it’s possible. Create something so good that people can’t help but use it (preferably the demographic you most want to reach, for example a country with a huge base of Windows users) and then use it as your message delivery mechanism.
1. I don't want to see political messages in unrelated delivery mechanisms
and
2. I created $PRODUCT as a delivery mechanism for a political message
are equally valid.
I feel that the problem that comes about is when a $PRODUCT was not created as a delivery mechanism but is being co-opted into being one at some later stage; the audience feels deceived and the creator feels that the audience is ungrateful.
I'm not very familiar with Notepad++ (having never used it, nor experienced any desire to try it), but I'm fairly certain that the creator has been political long enough now that the audience cannot complain about the message being delivered with the product.
It's like complaining about Vim having a message for the plight of Ugandans - it's been there for decades; too late to complain now about it.
I'm more sympathetic to complaints over projects which never had a specific political message suddenly acquiring one when they realised what a large audience they had, or when new people join a decades-old project and introduce a political message that was never there before. I can sorta understand outrage then.
It's bizarre to me how much attention this site pays to ~influencers~ self-promoters who aren't even AI researchers. Anything substantial on this topic is likely going to be presented at siggraph, or written by someone who does actual research in the field. We're acting like "all-round web tech enthusiasts" are real authorities and letting them suck all the air out of the room in this constant barrage of AI hype.
I respect Simon's work, and have no desire to disparage him. He's an accomplished engineer who has made great contributions to the industry.
But he's not an authority on this subject. And even if he were, this community has a strange obsession with authority figures. Appeals to authority are frequently thrown around to back up an argument. Opinions made by dang, pg, tptacek, sama, et al, are held in higher regard than those made by random accounts. It's often not about the value of what is being said, but about who says it, which is detrimental to open discourse.
I would argue that opinions from authority figures should be challenged more than anyone else's. They are as fallible as everyone, but they're also in a position to influence and mislead a lot of people. So many of humanity's problems were caused by deranged leaders wielding their power and influence over masses. I think this is especially important in the case of this technology, where many people have a lot to gain from certain narratives, and many more have a lot to lose depending on how all this plays out.
I’ve been thinking the same thing lately. It’s hard to tell if I’m just old and want everyone off my lawn, but I really feel like IT is a dead end lately. “Vintage” electronics are often nicer to use than modern equivalents. Like dials and buttons vs touch screens. Most of my electronics that have LCDs feel snappy and you sort of forget that you’re using them and just do what you were trying to do. I’m not necessarily a Luddite. I know tech _could_ be better theoretically but it’s distressing to know that it’s also not possible for things to be different for some other reasons. Economically, culturally? I don’t know.
E2E encryption probably isn’t enough to protect activists trying to organize. Without doing onion routing where you pre-compute some nodes it in the network that it MUST transit prior to delivery and having them decrypt it until it arrives to the recipient (like Tor) you still leak who’s talking to who.
Neither E2EE or Tor are enough to protect someone being targeted by state level actors. They're helpful, but if you're a high enough value target, they only slow down your adversary. If you're relying on algorithms on your computer to protect you, you should be prepared to meet the hacking wrench. [1]
If the political environment gets bad enough, you may expect to die anyway, and the TTL difference that obfuscation provides means the difference between making a small improvement before the inevitable, or not.
Part of me feels the same way, and ~2015 me was full on SPA believer, but nowadays I sigh a little sigh of relief when I land on a site with the aesthetic markers of PHP and jQuery and not whatever Facebook Marketplace is made out of. Not saying I’d personally want to code in either of them, but I appreciate that they work (or fail) predictably, and usually don’t grind my browser tab to a halt. Maybe it’s because sites that used jQuery and survived, survived because they didn’t exceed a very low threshold of complexity.
reply