Why should I bother to read an article that the "author" didn't write? Might as well just go prompt Claude. Or is this about saving tokens?

I don’t see it as the author being lazy, actually the opposite, I see it as being performative and a tryhard. Either way it’s annoying and doesn’t make me want to read it.

After looking into it, as I suspected, the author seems to make his living by selling people the feeling that they’re in the cutting edge of the AI world. Whether or not the feeling is true I don’t know, but with this in mind this performance makes sense.

Perhaps they're pointing out the level of double standards in condemnation China gets compared to the US, lack of censorship notwithstanding.

Are you saying we cannot talk about the bad things the US has done?

No I'm saying we can, unlike how it is in China. Besides that point, I think GP is arguing that China is villinized more than the US.

I'm pretty sure if you criticise the US on something they care about, you posts will disappear from social media pretty quickly. Not because of political censorship but because of Trust and Safety violations

Are you actually claiming the US is not criticized here?

The US govt doesn't force censorship of its history, good or bad.

they do it differently. the executive just lies to you while you watch a video of what's really happening, and if you start protesting, you're a domestic terrorist. or a little piggy, if you ask awkward questions.

It tries to, in bouts

It doesn't matter how it's stored. So long as it isn't E2EE, they (and anyone who can ask for it) will be able to access the drives

That 'Ad' text is literally the smallest text in the entire app listing UI

It's not. Just glimpsing the top of the article will reveal this is a patently false statement.

Something I don't get about Apple haters is they just spout absolute bllx for no apparent reason. I don't feel the need to defend Apple, I just want a reasoned discussion. I just don't get this attitude.

I share your frustration. I’m an Apple user and absolutely dislike everything about their direction regarding software. I have nothing but criticism for Tim Cook. Yet I see myself having to correct batshit lies people make about Apple to have a proper discussion. There’s no need to make shit up (and doing so gives Apple the opportunity to outright dismiss those as haters), Apple makes a lot of crappy decisions we can criticise in good faith.

also true, thanks.

You could tell the article is written in a way to try to calm against the major concerns without actually bringing those concerns up. "We won't share your chats and you can turn off personalization!" Hmm yeah there's a missing piece of info here...

"Best" is subjective. Proofs can get very long especially for the harder ones mathematicians are tackling these days.

This is exactly the kind of backwards thinking that pushes people against inquisition and consultation. They people in charge have a good idea of the playing field but it's always good to ask for input.

You do it as part of an international order, i.e. an impartial UN. Though obviously we don't have that yet.

The only 'leaders' that end up in the Hague and convicted are those forcibly captured via military action. And those 'orders' declared by the UN can, and be vetoed by China, Russia, USA, UK, and France. Guess which two use their veto all the time?

And there are not that many indications that we are moving towards that direction or we can even ever have. I guess that sort of idealism might have existed in the late 40s immediately after the UN was established but it never had a chance.

External or internal (which seems rarely feasible unless the government is highly incompetent) regime change realistically is the only thing that worked.

That sort of idealism existed as late as 1962, but its leading proponent was cancelled in 1963: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46482997

Come to think of it, WJC signed the Rome Statute in 2000, but then GWB unsigned it in 2002, which, coincidentally or uncoincidentally, was followed by the first reports of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisone... in 2003

Pretty sure there are plenty but non that have done so so brazenly

Not the CEOs of any significant companies, no. Most boards would not tolerate this; being a CEO is generally a full-time job, and the conflicts of interest don’t bear thinking about.

Most of the others have jobs I think