I feel like the world needs more sound engineers. There's a constant humming of the machines and we all suffer for it. We also need more vigilance about preventing noise pollution. The beep, beep, beep may make a company feel like it is doing something for safety, but there is no counterforce that they have to answer to about what they are doing to everyone else not involved. (I know there is a better sound to replace beep beep beep but it hasn't made it to my neighborhood yet)

We would need to figure out a quantifiable metric for annoyance level. Municipal sound ordinances do tend to correctly utilize SPL(A) and SPL(C), with A-weighting being relevant for safety against ear injury (low frequencies have less influence) and C-weighting being relevant for annoyance level (low frequencies have more influence), but this isn't nearly enough. For example, ordinances carve out additional tolerance for burstiness, which makes sense for rare events like jackhammering but not for common events like routine plant operations. Sound with lots of harmonic content (think distortion) is more annoying than without. High frequencies can be worse if they reach you, but they're less likely to reach you (approaching a need for line-of-sight). It's complicated.

Here's a free idea for someone to run with: just as Zillow has a neighborhood "walkability" score prospective buyers might look at, there could be various pollution scores, including sound and light, sourced from some kind of Flock-like (ew) network of capture devices. Some folks are into mounting things like personal weather stations on their property, so maybe a new generation of devices capturing this type of data (with local signature-based identification of sources, and triangulation when the same thing is heard in multiple places, etc.) wouldn't be too far-fetched.

All the sound engineers in the world can't fix "don't care" and "want to".

A modern US city has the combined problems of cheap construction of residential buildings, with insufficient unit-to-unit and exterior noise isolation (builders "don't care"), and near-zero enforcement of vehicle noise laws (police and muffler shops "don't care", drivers "want to" be loud).

Contrast this with, say, Germany or Switzerland, where concrete construction is the norm, noise laws are often strictly enforced, and a modified car would get pulled over quickly.

It's the Simpsons "Everything's OK" alarm: (note: loud and annoying noise) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxNp3bUDtxY

They could start with building codes. State of the art, beautiful new designs where you can hear every word of the meeting next door.

The constant humming that causes the overwhelming population-weighted noise pollution comes from cars and airplanes, due to the fact that in America it is currently not legal to build an apartment except within 100ft of a freeway or at the ends of airports.

That gave me a chuckle

I just didn't think that either of them were very good. Sinners was okay, and One Battle After Another was just kind of silly, I think regardless of your political views.

Oddly enough, X is the only platform i've been able to teach to not show me culture war stuff, from either side. It just shows me AI in the "For You."

The uncomfortable truth to most "the algorithm is biased" takes is that we humans are far more politically biased than the algorithms and we're probably 90% to blame.

I'm not saying there is no algorithmic bias, and I tend to agree the X algorithm has a slight conservative bias, but for the most part the owners of these sites care more about keeping your attention than trying to get you to vote a certain way. Therefore if you're naturally susceptible to cultural war stuff, and this is what grabs your attention, it's likely the algorithm will feed it.

But this is far more broad problem. These are the types of people who might have watched political biased cable news in the past, or read politically biased newspapers before that.

the issue brought up in the article isn't that "the algorithm is biased" but that "the algorithm causes bias". A feed could perfectly alternate between position A and position B and show no bias at all, but still select more incendiary content on topic A and drive bias towards or away from it.

I've been pretty consistent about telling Bluesky I want to see less of anything political and also disciplined about not following anybody who talks about Trump or gender or how anybody else is causing their problems. I see very little trash.

Maybe it has gotten better recently. I tried and tried with Bluesky, but it would not abide.

It was bad the week Trump got elected, it’s gotten better since then.

Love the title. Yeah, agents need to experiment in the real world to build knowledge beyond what humans have acquired. That will slow the bastards down.

Perhaps they will revel in the friends they made along the way.

If only we had a battle tested against reality self learning system.

I agree but I fear it won't stay that way. They boil us frogs slowly.

I just finished reading House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski, and this could have been one of the chapters.

Ha, funnily enough I just bought it after hearing about it on that thread with the 90's 'strange website'. Not cracked it open yet, it's quite a tome.

Don't read it, unless you're in for psychological trauma. That book is messed up

He has a new one out too. Also, he's the brother of the singer Poe.

Skip the Johnny Truant bits and its half the length with hardly anything of value lost.

Maybe they are just calling the jobs by different names? It seems like names of roles are constantly shifting. "Data scientist" is a term that is going out of fashion.

Pretty large claim to insinuate Indeed can't even tell when their own users are simply shifting terms around...

This is the company so large, their jobs data was used in lieu of the Fed's jobs data when the gov was shut down.

Which side are you talking about?

You don't say?

It's also a lot more fun to lose weight than maintain weight