This is the real winner. Changing culture from the outside is way harder than on the inside, let alone collecting evidence of crimes committed by other gang members.

That’s because OpenAI is in panic mode. They’re now spending their resources on making the LLM cheaper to operate and capable of injecting paid results.

You get more stuff, more status, etc. Or alternatively, penalized, threatened, etc. Whatever it takes to motivate people to do the job. Even if paper money isn’t a thing in communist societies (which it still is), money’s just a symbol for debt. You’re going to get something, somehow, for a job people greatly desire to be done without enough doers and they’ll become “indebted” to you disproportionately for doing it.

In Soviet society for instance, you might be provided a nice apartment in central Moscow if you were doing something “important”. This assignment would be via your government-controlled employer and their agreements with some other government bureau that officially managed the buildings to dole them out to select people.

So, same deal as anywhere else, just a different mechanism. Higher ration, bigger dacha, jump to the front of the line to get a car, etc.

Compensation is usually not much about how dangerous a job is, though. It’s more about how many people are willing to do it for any number of reasons. Some people are just not very risk-adverse, and figure they’re going to be fine at a job that is more dangerous. And they’ll be compensated at a normal level as long as there are enough such people to fill the need.

Look into mutual insurance. You actually get back money for the payouts they didn’t have to do that year. Northwestern, Amica, USAA, etc.

Well, the piece of paper is better than nothing. I can’t prove I own like 99% of my stuff. Even with a receipt, who’s to say the thing is exactly the same one I spent the money on?

The thing that feels hopeless here is that “dynamic pricing” is like…the natural way to sell stuff if that makes sense? Standardized non-negotiated pricetags evolved as part of the growth of industrialization and mass consumerism. It just wasn’t feasible to have individual salespeople trying to milk each customer out of the most possible money for every transaction for small purchases, and big box stores eliminated the shopkeeper role as a quasi-salesperson who might do that from time to time. But that still IS how many, many sales work today. It’s just that “negotiated prices” are reserved for big ticket items where salespeople get a big enough cut. Real estate, B2B deals, new cars, etc are sold by salespeople whose main job is moneymilking based on what they think they can con the particular buyer into handing over.

Technology, as the great optimizer, is merely making the job of a salesperson automated enough to be applied at the Taco Bell drivethru using your personal data.

Cache-like storage, private user-specific data, blobby or otherwise schemaless data. Stuff like that. But IMO it’s a matter of time until you find a need to operate against this data relationally, and then you regret using document storage. I’ve made this mistake twice now and do not intend to make it again. I now consider document storage architecture to be a performance optimization with significant tradeoffs, and not a choice to be made by default for nearly any scenario.

I don’t like tokens or cards. I like open play, just pay like $20 for all day access. I’m fortunate to have places like that around. The pay to play model penalizes you for being bad at or new to an arcade title or pinball machine, which mega blows and discourages people from trying out random games they might lose quickly at.

Oh i thought it was from CCCP commisar goons ordering a column of type 59s to drive over civilians in 89

Jailbreaking the cursed sword chatbot logic

Well this guy really doubled down on that thought

Played pre-TV Tim Allen for a bit. Never got caught, but I did get robbed of a whole delivery once. Quit after that, too stressful.

I really hate these awful “puzzles”. They only work by the asker intentionally withholding what, if any, constraints exist in the problem space leaving it totally vague, but of course there ARE secret constraints revealed if you violate them with your answer.

Me: “I do it without flipping any switches. I just ask the lightswitches which one controls the light, and they tell me.”

Interviewer: “That’s not allowed.”

Me: “Well what exactly is allowed? Can I pull the cables out of the wall and see which connects to the bulb? Oh, I bet that’s not allowed. How about I open my smart home app and just check which of the smart switches is labeled for it? Oh, I bet it’s not a smart switch so I can’t do that either? Oh, then the bulb has a chime that boops when it comes on, so I just listen for the boop. Oh that’s not allowed either? Wait wait wait, the walls are glass, so I just watch to see when the bulb comes on when I flick the switches.”

Even the canonical answer makes a dumb assumption. Ordinary LED bulbs don’t get hot.

The orgs publishing this junk are pushing the writers to use AI. So the writers and editors can’t shit talk AI because their boss will get upset.

My wife is pregnant with a baby boy. Doctors today just told us if he survives to birth, he will be profoundly mentally disabled. I don’t know how to financially prepare for this. Is there anything that can prevent our child from having a difficult life?

Oh you mean like how AI for driving changed cars so nobody drives themselves any more?

I bet we would start to see chinese adapters showing up on the market with DisplayPort to HDMI2.1 though.

It’s $1.2M to gain majority share on the HDMI board, but it sure would be nice if someone gave $1.2M to one of the engineers with access to that cryptographic DRM keys for the binary to “apparently get hacked” and have the keys magically appear online.

“I don’t use social media, and I don’t have an email.”

Well my approach is:

• Mark off every candidate who did not bother to provide a statement
• Mark off every candidate with no listed volunteering experience in the little section for it
• Mark off every candidate whose statement claims they will do things their desired office is not empowered to do
• Mark off every candidate with a platform that doesn’t claim to be aiming for any kind of change or improvement in particular. (I don’t support chair warmers.)
• Mark off every candidate whose email is a personal one listed as itsyaboymrthiccpenis@yahoo.com or something else similarly unprofessional
• Mark off any candidate aligned with the party that supported the coup attempt in 2021

After this quick pass, which only takes a couple of minutes, I’m typically only left with two or three offices with more than one remaining choice to compare. I then read their platform and pick the candidate with the platform goal that seems most relevant to my or my community’s interest.