I am reminded of Ursala Le Guinn’s remarks on SciFi authors being professional liars, not prophets.

The advent of the AI bubble has made this distinction much more trenchant for me. I was already somewhat aware before, but I am now much more likely to judge someone's character on whether they believe science fiction, broadly, is a roadmap to the future or a reflection and exploration of current conditions and historical contingencies.

Keep in mind that Butt-Face Chester Cheeks is simply a special case of Tickle Me Elmo, and strategize accordingly

No way there's any recency bias when the training data is heavily weighted towards the contemporary cesspools of Reddit/Twitter/Stack Overflow/etc., right? Such timelessness, very archetypal

This is terrible, absolutely horrible, disendorsement is only a few short steps from defenestration. How could these people do this

Was she floating around the David Chapman/post-rationalist corner of TPOT? That seems to ring a bell for me

I feel like his initial momentum came from picking interview subjects who were technical leaders but not well-known outside their niches and rarely were subjects of long-form interviews. Jim Keller and Chris Lattner were two who stood out for me early on, although I couldn’t finish their interviews because Lex himself was such a drag to listen to. He’s put some work into public speaking skills, but not nearly enough.

I refuse to knock him for his accent; a strong accent could even be an asset for standing out in the hugely overcrowded podcast industry. But the guy just doesn’t seem to cultivate any charisma or any real curiosity. The only time I’ve seen him show a smidge of passion was when I saw a clip of him ranting about “anti-woke” bullshit, which should tell you what his (and his backers’) real objective is.

Oh yeah, transfer my enthusiasm, mister high-stepping HH man. Update my priors till they're so bleeding-edge that they've become subsequents. This is masterfully persuasive marketing rhetoric that will convince everyone and leave no holdouts. Scott Adams would be smearing his hands with Vaseline to prep for your appearance on his podcast, if he was still around.

Gal Gadot appeared on the “Happy Sad Confused” podcast to promote her Prime Video action movie “The Runner”

Lmao, so 10 years ago this thing would have been issued direct to Redbox and possibly Dollar Tree.

e: oh wait, the Bitcoin AI-slop movie is something separate, and they don't seem to discuss distribution details (something that Variety is often meticulous about). So maybe not even that...

I mainly know him from Smash Bros where his big attack is sucking you in close and beating you with his comically large mallet, and that seems like a reasonable metaphor for what being bombarded with slop commits feels like

end result: well, we for sure got the streaming anime

Wouldn't you be so grateful that your modular repairable upgradeable laptop that you probably sunk at least $2k into, and probably plan on owning for the long term, has specifically funded support for this steaming pile of crap?

edit:

As AI is increasingly producing high severity CVEs against core infrastructure, security needs to be top of mind for all developers, but especially authors of distributions targeted at developers. Lately there have been innumerable reports of developer machines being compromised and their access used to contaminate the software supply chain or exploit production systems. Developers are high-value targets because of the level of access they are often granted. Developer machines typically disable security guardrails for convenience, store credentials in plain-text dotfiles, and accumulate access to systems. This must change.

I'll microwave a surplus Funko Pop doll if this paragraph wasn't cut-n-pasted straight from chatbot output

OP definitely has a kernel of a point, and there's a lot to discuss regarding it, but he sprints right past it all to uselessly compress the conversation into the ~~ timeless dialectic of class consciousness ~~. The acculturation of software developers generally towards the ownership class is, if anything, still under-analyzed! You come into the industry already propagandized that if you just join the right startup and bust your ass, you're gonna hit it big! In this way, it's important to understand, and describe to others, Hacker News as a propaganda tool to shape and condition technical discussion, rather than the common perception of a neutral, focused technical discussion forum.

And the end circumstance is, even if you are awarded stock options at most of the big Silicon Valley firms, thanks to multi-class share structures, you're given a booby-prize version of ownership! Your decision is binary, cash out or hold, you have no effective decision-making power over the future of the enterprise. There's a lot of persuasive points here that still aren't widespread in the public dialogue! But no, I guess it makes more sense to continue the same old tactic of labeling everyone we hate and fear with an obscure, difficult-to-spell French loanword. The rhetorical tactic that has been pretty demonstrably ineffective for over a century now.

There are, of course, equally valid reasons to be pessimistic. The historically-contingent development of computer programming has mainly been along lines that are obfuscatory rather than accessible, subject to continuous framework and API churn, fetishizing rapid delivery of "new features" over stability. All these aspects help create a false sense of mastery on the part of those who pass through the firewall of skill and tedium, then further combine with the class-mobility propaganda to create a false sense of security. And the interposition of uninspectable, poorly-replicable AI systems is the culmination of the rot, approaching the point where even the supposedly masterful programmer doesn't really know what their system is doing, let alone the end user. In this way, I have to agree that there is far greater potential for solidarity with the users on whom this crap is imposed rather than the sunk-cost dead-enders who keep crapping it out.

But even then, I still don't trust OP's conceptual framework to build that solidarity. This is precisely the genre of Marxist argument that is most tedious and least effective, the kind that approaches religious fundamentalism. Dude's writing seriously reads like Christian fundamentalist bullshit papered over with Marxist jargon. Later in the thread, we get bangers like

The middle class individual, the petty bourgeois, yearns for the righteousness of the proletariat, and avoids coming to terms with their own privileged status. That status frequently precludes them from making moral, ethical decisions, because their fleeting privileges and narrow expertise makes it difficult and dangerous for them to fall out of line, that line being drawn by the rich, the haute bourgeoisie.

Replace "righteousness of the proletariat" with "grace of the saved," "privileged status" with "fallen nature," "haute bourgeoisie" with "liberal elite" etc. and you'd have the exact output of somebody in a Texas megachurch. Dude's a Jesus freak, his Jesus just happens to be named Karl.