Signal to noise ratio is getting *lower (EDIT: was higher) than ever. I don't see a way out of this other than "human certified" digitally signed authorship (e.g. by using eIDAS in EU). There could be a proxy to at least retain pseudo-anonymity, but trackable to a human. Tragedy of commons strikes again.
"Tragedy of commons" is a false concept that obscures greed and selfishness and often lawlessness. Even its originator (Hardin) accepts that it does not describe actual history.
The use of the word Tragedy in the name I think makes it easier for people to excuse themselves when they monopolize the commons. “Oh it’s a tragedy humans are just selfish we can’t avoid it.” The tragedy is that people are comfortable excusing others selfish, greedy behavior by saying it’s innate.
There’s a lot of debate under your linked comment.
My understanding is that people tend to cooperate in smaller numbers or when reputation is persistent (the larger the group, the more reliable reputation has to be), otherwise the (uncommon) low-trust actors ruin everything.
Most humans are altruistic and trusting by default, but a large enough group will have a few sociopaths and misunderstood interactions; which creates distrust across the entire group, because people hate being taken advantage of.
> Most humans are altruistic and trusting by default ...
... towards an in-group, yes. Not towards out-groups, as far as I can tell.
Though for some reason this tends not to apply to solo travellers in many, many parts of the world.
Lots of debate, yes, but very little about the basic fact that Hardin's formulation of "the tragedy of the commons" doesn't describe actual historical events in pretty any well documented case.
Although, there are other large-scale examples where tragedy of the commons has been (practically) avoided: ozone depletion and Polio eradication. Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons#Non-gov...) also mentions Elinor Ostrom, but her examples involve "smaller numbers".
It could be interesting to have a search engine that only shows results that have human attestation via digital passports. Of course I'd prefer that to work without necessarily revealing the identity of the poster, similarly to how anonymous "sign-up tokens" for accounts would work, to prevent sybil attacks.
Marginalia doesn't actually use whitelists though, but it does give preference to results from known human websites, as well as sites that are linking to and being linked from that set.
Open source is not open contribution. There are many examples of open source, but closed contribution, e.g. SQLite.
What you are listing is a business strategy of a company (free labor and advertising). Desires of a company are very different from an unpaid volunteer.
In projects that leave PRs unanswered, the maintainer is already unpaid labor, but contributor want him to work on the contribution. That might not align with what maintainer wants.
Edit: Personally, I find reviewing least pleasant part of dev work. Thanks to LLMs, that now also significantly more of my paid work. My desire to do code reviews in my free time is massively lower. I would rather do it myself.
Somehow I suspect there will be a tech billionaire who will exclusively eat genetically modified maggots while the rest of us will be forced to subsist on chicken.
It’s Logan’s Run to the book. Then they wonder why the west is turning to “crazy populists” when the “sane and democratic” ones go around supporting this kind of stuff…
My country is going to require a recyclable plastic bottles. That means bringing empty plastic bottles full of air into a shop, so a machine can squash them and send somewhere.
This will bring down marketshare significantly. It's incredibly hassle, which is likely the point.
I am looking for good and cheap sodastream cola syrup, but they are very expensive.
> Saying this as a German, where the economy is the worst it’s been in decades and our federal government acts incapable at changing this so far.
That's not true. Germany has a 200-points plan on reducing the bureaucracy. At first it sounds like a joke, but actual points would be transformative if all points were done... I don't see it happening.
As an example, automatic approvals if a response is done within a deadline would be huge. I don't see that happening.
Or possibly happening, then there will be a scandal, and it will be rolled back.
Another funny trick is a "We are looking at it" response, or "The EIA doesn't use standardized language in ground water section, rework it" (EIA was made by company that specializes in that).
Anyone who bought DVD player immediately had the benefits of better quality. The same applies to all other examples.
The problem with IPv6 is that you don't get benefits. If the designed protocol needs an equivalent of big bang, it's doomed. ASCII->UTF8 didn't need big bang. x86 to Itanium needed big bang.
