I read you argue in favour of far-right German anti-immigration politics a few days ago, in which you admitted living in .de, now you're saying that there is no one better than Trump for US citizens?
How would you know and why would you have such a strong opinion?
Do you also happen to astroturf rightoid politics on Twitter by any chance? I heard it's a common pastime.
you seemed so obsessed with me. I simply asked a question. Also I'm entitled to have my opinions. I don't even know what astroturf rightoid means.
Also your framing of "I read you argue in favour of far-right German anti-immigration politics a few days ago" intended to discredit my question, like would it be valid only the questions came from far-left antifa supporters?
FWIW I have never heard or seen the Hoka brand in my life until now. I wouldn’t even try to google what On looks like. The first time I heard about Allbirds is when they pivoted to AI.
A 5min 'best running shoes' session would mention both Hokas, ON's etc.
That's an anecdote, not a bubble in my opinion. I have a counterexample where I have not worn any Hoka's but have seen/known of them. Have multiple pairs of On shoes.
YMMV but Hoka Bondi is the most comfortable pair of sneakers I've ever had in my life. I'm not going back to Nike. Haven't heard/seen much of them until this year too though.
For me personally, On shoes are probably the most comfortable pairs I've ever owned. Their waterproof sneakers are the only ones I've ever had that's actually fully waterproof. If you're looking for a decent pair of sneakers you should at least take a look at their Cloud line.
This is in style now. My tween daughter and her peers all own shoes that look geriatric to my eyes. I see teenagers walking around in New Balance shoes that look like my dad would have owned them 20 years ago.
This is actually not at all style of On shoes. The New Balance / Adidas / Nike 90s "dad shoes" have been cool for almost a decade now (Balenciaga released their "dad" sneaker in 2016).
On shoes look like shoes for retirees right now. Teenagers don't wear On shoes.
The film Crazy Stupid Love features Ryan Gosling telling Steve Carrell he dresses like a stale 40-something divorcee then throwing his New Balance meshy running sneakers off the balcony of the mall. That was 2011.
At which point does this argument stop being valid? Is the project manager the one that created the product? Is it the CEO that is paying the people to? Is it the bank that has granted the loan to build the company?
In my view, the one that "creates" is the one that puts in the majority of the effort. Under this definition, the average vibe coder isn't creating anything.
Somehow I’m more afraid of it being in the hands of Altman, with his ‘I’m creating a better world for everyone’ god complex, than Musk who is just a run-of-the-mill sociopathic nerd.
There is no one is more dangerous than one who believes he is doing the right thing.
> I live under a rock. Why is musk hated so much in here?
Let's say for a moment that you "live under a rock" enough that you actually haven't got a clue why Musk is such a hated figure (not only just here, but across a huge portion of humanity)...
You should count yourself lucky that you haven't been absolutely assaulted by the monstrosity known as "modern media". You're one of the fortunate few. Enjoy your life. It's better than many.
But lying (e.g. “full self driving next year”) and cheating (too early inclusion of spacex into various indexes) and whatever dogde was, should explain most of it.
Connections with other disliked characters doesn’t help either.
He promotes right-authoritarian politics (including a Nazi salute he later denied but watch the video), promotes “race science” and xenophobia, lies and exaggerates a lot, openly attempted to bribe voters in an election, and a lot of nasty personal stuff has come out.
He’s lost his mind IMO, from drugs and extreme social media addiction. As for the right-authoritarian “fash” stuff I’m not sure if it’s always been there or if it’s an opportunistic infection.
I still give him credit for helping push the EV revolution forward and for finally building reusable rocket boosters. The latter has been talked about and studied for decades before and is clearly the best way to make a reusable launch system but NASA and its “old space” contractors never executed on it. Probably because overly complicated approaches like the shuttle and disposable rockets were more short term profitable.
But note that all that stuff happened for the most part before the mid-teens, or at least that was when Musk made his contribution to it. I don’t think his mind is what it was.
If he’d died in 2015 he would be the GOAT. Die a hero or live long enough to become a villain.
I don’t think a ranking is particularly helpful anyway: All of them are absolutely unfit to wield that much power. I’m not even sure if AI should be progressed by private corporations in the first place; combining shareholder interest and revenue goals with the biggest social experiment in history and unprecedented research into artificial intelligence is an all around bad idea.
How could that lead to anything but misaligned incentives? This technology will never serve humanity when it is developed to inadvertently serve the monetary interest of a few.
Someone with the resources to do things is far more dangerous than someone without.
If you local librarian thinks
He is doing the right thing he’s not going to cause massive war or destroy the economy and wipe out 2/3rd of crops.
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. People like musk, altman, trump have unprecedented power in history - far more than the kings of medieval times.
Thank you, but we're discussing who's the worse to decide the fate of humanity between Amodei, Musk and Altman, not if one should be afraid of their local librarian. All three currently hold a lot of power in their hands.
Though I know I attracted all the downvotes for not agreeing with most Americans that Musk is the worst person since Adolf.
Someone who firmly thinking that doing the evil thing is going to be the most joyful experience for themselves is not exactly better. It even simply animated by doing whatever come to their mind that day, whatever the consequences in fashion that is perfect amorale don't give a shit of the consequences for the world.
The one that think he's doing the right thing at least do care about following some morale compass.
xAI v. Ellison [1], where xAI argue that the right to denudify people is a First Amendment right, and therefore fine, regardless of the person it is depicting.
> HF 1606’s principal sponsor stated that this was an “intentional” drafting decision, explaining there is no way to distinguish between images that are nudified with and without consent.22 But any interest that Minnesota has in preventing nonconsensual “nudification” cannot sustain a prohibition on consensual“ nudification
Doe v. xAI [0], where it seems Grok was intentionally trained on CSAM, as part of the "denudification" tooling.
Currently... It very much seems that Musk believes that if a kid says 'yes', then that is consent. Despite them being a kid.
But, from a guy who tried fairly hard to get to Epstein's island, that's not exactly surprising. [2]
He's not wrong. It would still be better to have posts about the innards of Erlang, than the daily press releases or manufactured Twitter drama by OpenAI and Anthropic to generate hype for their IPO. We will just have to close an eye for the weekly point release of major AI models get 10 posts + associated reactions by thought leaders
He's annoying right with the "You guys are like the crowdsourced version of one of those troublesome overliteral genies" part too, which accurately represents LLMs as well... Wait, are LLMs training on us perhaps? (It's a joke, of course they are)
How would you know and why would you have such a strong opinion?
Do you also happen to astroturf rightoid politics on Twitter by any chance? I heard it's a common pastime.
reply