Of course, no worries. Nothing irreplaceable will be lost ;) It was meant as a general example to be used in future arguments for everybody in tech leadership.
This is a really bad take (and bad faith) because all the failed tech initiatives you mentioned barely had any adoption whereas LLM based AI tools are used by a billion people a week.
I’ve been hearing this for 3 years now. Exactly how long do you want people to live in fear?
This feels like Elon’s FSD predictions. In 2013 he claimed 90% of the miles would be driven autonomously by 2016. It’s now 2026… 10 years after the prediction was supposed to come true and we’re still waiting.
If you're sure of this, then what actions have you taken to shield yourself and/or profit from this? If I were a true believer that AI was going to takeover, I'd be allocating a large part of my portfolio into AI companies (hardware & software) along with learning a trade that's relatively safe, like cleaning septic tanks or construction.
Do you really believe in the narrative you're pushing?
> allocating a large part of my portfolio into AI companies
Even if you were certain that AI would take over virtually everything, the problem is deciding which AI companies to invest in. Thinking back to 1996, just when this new thing called "the web" was gaining tracking and assuming you were certain it was going to be huge, what companies would be the best investment? A lot of the companies doing web stuff went nowhere. Many of the biggest successes didn't even exist in 1996. It's not obvious which (if any) AI companies are worth investing in even if you're positive that AI is the future; the current companies might be massively overvalued; the best AI companies might not even exist yet.
My greater concern is the people of Iran. Especially since Iran has conscription so the people who end up dieing in a war didn't even consent to being made soldiers.
They've funded Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis for decades. They've assassinated dissidents on foreign soil. They sentence people to death for apostasy and flog women for not wearing hijab correctly.
The sanctions aren't about race. They're about behaviour.
Nobody said that. But they are a sovereign country that did not attack America. Bombing them because you find their internal politics distasteful is appalling, to say the least.
That’s not why they’re being bombed. They’re being bombed because they strive for nukes and ICBMs with ever larger range, all the while calling “death to america”.
P.S. downplaying their behavior to “distasteful”, is, well, distasteful.
There are no "good guys" in real-life. If you as an individual revile proxy conflict, assassination of dissidents abroad, torture and summary execution, then it's hard to stand on the American soapbox and demand change. Many Iranians still remember SAVAK, and are told stories of the last time they tried nationalizing their resources.
The US doesn't need an interventionist policy with Iran any more than we need to invade North Korea. Israel needs it though, and their entire strategy is to risk American lives for their meaningless expansion campaign.
No. But they are a sovereign nation who didn't directly bomb the US or its allies.
>They've funded Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis for decades. They've assassinated dissidents on foreign soil. They sentence people to death for apostasy and flog women for not wearing hijab correctly.
You want to know who the US has funded? You want to know who Israel has funded?
I mean, shit, the US took out Iran's democratically elected government in the 1970s and was a huge fan of the Mullahs because they let us steal Iranian oil. The same secular Iranian government that was quite literally the first middle eastern country to recognize the existence of Israel, and was a leading secular state in a region of ass-backwards religious nutcases.
Israel has refused to acknowledge the obvious existence of its nuclear weapons program while Iran is a full member of the IAEA and allows for full international inspection of its uranium facilities.
Fuck, the Israelis engage in massive blackmailing operations of their own "allies" (see Epstien, Jeffrey) , attack their own "allies" (see USS Liberty attack), and have tried to goad its "allies" into carrying out attacks on their behalf. They are a tiny bully that starts shit they cannot handle themselves, and American lives are sacrificed because of it.
Around where I live (Chicago suburbs), BK restaurants are closing often. Even new ones, open for a year or so close down (many buildings are turned into dispensaries for some reason). Their issues are deeper than how employees greet customers.
I cannot imagine a scenario where I'd want those in my neighborhood. Glad you like them, but I hope they don't make it to the west suburbs where I live.
Who are you talking about who likes the cameras? It isn't me. But if you're in a suburb of Chicagoland, my guess is your neighbors like them a bunch. They won't like Flock, because of the Trump administration and ICE press around Flock, but ALPRs are commodity technology now and you'll likely roll out some other vendor, like the munis surrounding Oak Park did.
Right, you're the 2nd most liberal muni in Illinois after us. But Wilmette still has theirs, just like River Forest still has their ALPRs. I think a lot of munis will drop Flock, because of the bad PR, but they're just going to stand up no-name ALPRs.
(For people unfamiliar with Chicagoland, Oak Park borders Chicago to its west and is like our version of Park Slope, and Evanston, which houses Northwestern University, borders Chicago to the North and is like our Westchester County.)
I was pretty irritable about us cancelling our Flock contract. We did a metric fuckton of regulation on our cameras; I think we may have had the most sophisticated ALPR regulation of any ALPR in the country (granted, that's a statement about how little regulation there is of them, but still). We could have disabled our cameras but kept the contract, kept our standing as a municipality that uses Flock, and then shopped our ordinances and police general orders to the neighboring municipalities.
Instead, we performatively cancelled our contract, while remaining 4.5 square miles surrounded on all sides by totally unregulated ALPRs.
This would be a more compelling rebuttal if I hadn't just told you a story about how we obtained exactly the outcome you claim to want in our own municipality.
Almost nobody on either side of the aisle likes the government putting up cameras in their neighborhood.
It's a reflexive reaction that Americans have to the government stepping on them. They get away with digital surveillance because it's generally well-hidden, but Trump is even changing that.
I really don't think this is true. I just watched lots and lots of people in an extraordinarily liberal suburb make impassioned cases for why they wanted these things up.
reply