Absolutely. The public doesn’t care what word games you play or what rights you allocate yourself in a terms of service if you pull off something shady you deserve all the bad publicity you get
Tech companies have the same problems as the NBA. there used to be career stars like Claude Shannon developing cultures of excellence out of teams like IBM, but just like Larry Bird and the Celtics, the free agent market and stars chasing the dollar has diminished the culture and thus the product.
This seems like very rose tinted glasses, and I think the summary is backwards. Shannon was an academic, and spent a little time at Bell Labs, but didn’t work at IBM. Business has always chased profits, by definition, it was absolutely no different in 1950. Bell & IBM had little pockets of ‘excellence’ in their research divisions that left behind a nice narrative of idyllic sounding work for a very few lucky people. But since then, the number of academics in tech has gone way up, the number of companies developing tech has gone way up, and the number of pockets where smart people can focus on inventing things is enormous today compared to 1950. I don’t believe either culture or product has diminished at all, I think it’s the opposite, things have gotten much better. Bell & IBM made telephones and accounting computers. Today we have games, AI, self-driving cars, mobile devices, the internet, digital arts, just to name a few. It might take time for the stories of the good places to work to percolate, but I think we have vastly more & bigger cultures of excellence today than Shannon ever dreamed of.
I appreciate your response, but I just don’t think any of the technologies you cite come close to the foundational technologies they rely upon like information theory or wire message transmission. Foundational technologies require time, culture and investment not just an influx of VC cash, and a few months of clever experimentation
Your top comment was about cultures of excellence in corporate research, and the economics of product development. Now we’re having a debate about the most impactful tech and/or researcher?
Nothing on my small list of examples was done on VC cash in a few months. And my list was not exhaustive (indicated by “just to name a few”), I’m leaving it up to you to name today’s impactful tech. You don’t think any foundational technology development is happening in the world today? Why? I disagree. Let’s add quantum, smartphones, CRISPR, 3d printing and bitcoin to the list. What is your criteria or metric for declaring information theory above AI? AI is building on theories of intelligence and thought and latent information content in ways Shannon never thought of. We don’t know which of today’s papers will have the most lasting impression yet, let’s revisit this question in the year 2070. I simply pointed out that places to do good research like Shannon was doing are far more common now than when he was doing it.
I think we basically agree on the need for long-term positions and cultures to develop things like CRISPR and Quantum. What my original post refers to is that the average FAANG employee stays at the company for a little over a year these are the free agency moves that hurt technology in innovations like the ones you mentioned..
Don’t conflate research with the average employee. There are still career tech stars and research groups today, in fact many, many more of them than in 1950. They aren’t average employees and never were, just like Shannon was not an average employee. The average employee in 1950 also changed jobs when it suited them.
Anyway, I don’t think it’s true that the average FAANG employee leaves in 1 year. Some people do job-hop looking for more pay or faster advancement, but everyone knows hopping too fast or too often is a red flag on a resume. I work in a big well known tech company amongst hundreds of career researchers, academics, and excellent developers, and your narrative doesn’t fit them at all. I’m aware of lots of other companies with similar situations.
Probably the biggest thing that’s happened between now and Shannon’s day is that corporate research pays so well and there’s so much of it now that researchers are flocking to corporate jobs and leaving academia. That isn’t necessarily a problem in terms of innovation, it might be a good thing on the whole, but it might be a problem for the university ecosystem.
America is the land of stand your ground laws in which a citizen may legally take a life if they feel endangered. Let's not forget the 1000 or so police kill every year.
We amateur criminologist assume intent in every clue. But Luigi, just like Roskalnikov, probably was a mixture of guilt, incompetence, and mental breakdown, as the reality of his situation and its hopelessness took over his thoughts.
Anyone speculating too far should think how well they would sleep after shooting someone on the street and fleeing the biggest manhunt in recent history. Then ask themselves what kind of decisions they could make after 2 days of no sleep and immense stress.
Not what I’m reading. People on my timeline are asking why we’re forced to pay into a feudal system in which health coverage is not guaranteed leaving them with hospital bills in the tens of thousands of dollars for minor procedures after their claim was arbitrarily denied. Others are asking how in the wealthiest nation on earth 1 million people go bankrupt from medical bills when guys like this CEO are making $56 million a year
Ruined your day? Although it is undoubtedly tech voyeurism the fact that these observations occur in every day life and don’t violate people’s privacy I would just like to invite you to get out more.
==occur in every day life and don’t violate people’s privacy==
Plenty of things happen in every day life, but are private (sex, break-ups, proposals, Dr. visits, etc.). I also noticed lots of these videos have people in the background. I doubt they were they notified that a video was being taken and uploaded publicly.
==I would just like to invite you to get out more.==
Maybe an alternative is to invite yourself to ask questions about why there are multiple comments with the same sentiment rather than reflexively telling them how to feel/act?
I suppose the person upthread could have been exaggerating or using hyperbole for effect, but it seems a bit much for something like this to "ruin your day".
Having said that, it also seems like a bit much for that other commenter to find it worth policing their feelings like that.
I don’t know if you intentionally take my point out of context, but the man was arguing that it ruined his day because there were such things as sex in these random clips.
There is a plague in here where people examine every statement in attempt to find the strongest evidence that can be used to refute the previous claim. If you don't make your sentences airtight, they will pull out semantic arguments for any type of counterexample. Among the set of replies, there is very little sympathetic comprehension of the essence of what was said. At times it can be maddening.
It's not just here, it's any place where technical people congregate. It's something wrong with technical people, I think. It probably has something to do with why terrorists are frequently engineers.
I don't think it is invading their privacy-with-a-big-P (after all I have no idea who these people are or where the lived etc), it is more just socially it felt inappropriate.
I think if a young family was sat on a park bench doing this and you went and sat on the bench between the mother and the father it would be considered at the least incredibly rude and inappropriate. Even if they are in a public place and you are not technically violating any laws, you'd still be acting in a way that most people would disagree with.
>if a young family was sat on a park bench doing this and you went and sat on the bench between the mother and the father it would be considered at the least incredibly rude and inappropriate.
context is everything in public settings. Was it a tired old man on a cane that clearly needed to sit down? clearly it's rude for the couple to at least not scoot over. is the bench super long? there's probably no real beef as long as you're not directly sitting in their personal space.
In this case, these are clips uploaded over a decade ago for one reason or another. Realistically it's the same case-by-case. In general I don't really feel any guilt per se.
If I can tweak the metaphor, it's more like sitting on a vantage point within the park and peering at them with binoculars, far enough away that they can't see. It's still ick but definitely intrudes on them far less.
No, it's more like someone took a photo of themselves to show to their family, and after they were done with it they left it on a bench in a park (perhaps not realizing that the photo wouldn't magically go away on its own), and a long long time afterwards someone happened to stumble upon it and look at it.
Yes! This is the nuance I’m looking for. There are issues with corporations exploiting our private lives and data but if one were to find someone’s family photo album left sitting around it doesn’t seem horrible to me to take a look.
>Did you asked the kids in the videos (who are grownups or teenagers now) if they are ok with random strangers watching their kids life?
>Also I would doubt, that most people were aware, that they were uploading the video to the general public.
Those sentences are working against each other. You don't need to ask for permission to observe something in public. That's what makes the public sphere public; that there are restrictions and expectations in the private sphere that don't exist in the public sphere. If someone mistakenly believes they're in private when they're not, that's unfortunate for them. It's their responsibility to know where they are, not your responsibility to act according to their expectation. You're not obligated to avert your gaze if someone walks out in public not wearing pants by mistake. Is it polite to do it? Sure. Is it wrong not to do it? No.
"Those sentences are working against each other. "
Not when the topic is privacy. This is not someone walking in public, those are videos out of private homes. Just because someone uploaded something, does not mean he had
a) the rights to do so (I saw a clip where a women asked a bit angry, are you making a movie?)
B) was aware what he is doing
(Google and co do have a incentive to mislead people about who will be able to access data)
So it might be technical legal. It if is moral, is up to yourself to decide.
>This is not someone walking in public, those are videos out of private homes.
Yes, it's like someone watching a private video on their phone while on the train. You don't have a right to not have someone looking over your shoulder if you do that. While out in public you have implicit permission to look over someone else's shoulder because that's what "public" means. Public means the absence of privacy.
>a) the rights to do so (I saw a clip where a women asked a bit angry, are you making a movie?)
>B) was aware what he is doing
Both are the problem of whoever took the video and/or uploaded it, not of the person watching it later.
>If you have to go out of your way, to look into my screen, than no, not ok.
Well, I didn't talk about what is OK or not OK. What I said is you don't have a right to not have someone looking over your shoulder. Unless that person is touching you or following you to do it, there's nothing you can do to stop someone who's snooping at your screen in public if they don't want to stop.
If your issue is the unwitting use of people’s images for corporate profit I think we can agree that especially irksome when it’s children. But does it ruin your day or seeing especially exploitative to see a child at a petting zoo or celebrating their birthday like maybe one in a dozen clip show or is there room for nuance?
The web in general sucks for quickly finding information. from the essays that proceed a recipe or a news site which autoplays an irrelevant video on every story. It not only wastes time it waste your phone data. The ChatGPT search feature has eliminated the junk and gives me the info I’m looking for.
