That sets the stage for overreach. If the data is public, and you are getting stalked, there is nowhere to hide. If corporations/organizations/agencies want to exploit your emotions for ads at any given moment of the day because they can see you and almost everything that happens to you, they can. If a lunatic leader gets elected who wants to kill off a specific group of people (nothing lasts forever, including political stability), its now much easier. With all that in mind, can I ask why?
Everyone seems to suggest the above narratives, but in truth this is just not the case. Maybe for 0.0000001% of the time it is the narratives above. But the truth is, if Putin or Jay Jones wants someone dead he will get the right spy and do it without a massive surveillance net.
No, the vast majority of the use case is stopping crime that today we can't stop. I want the crime to stop.
And, in a safe country like this one (I am in the United States but most developed countries are pretty safe), if a little petty crime is so scary
to them that they need a mass surveillance network to sleep at night... I don't see any reason why the public should have to sacrifice potential freedoms for that weakness.
Working on a bot for chatrooms (irc, discord) that will drop in and roast you (llm powers) in front of the whole server randomly, completely out of the blue.
Nothing is ever going to be completely equal in society. Innovation is driven by labor being capital (thus profit), or by influence (state backed stuff loses money in exchange for influence). I have a right to make money with resources at my disposal. Taxes are exchanged for the privileges of citizenship, and hopefully, someday, the ability to not get screwed by insurance.
Correct me if I am wrong, I am open to ideas. My knowledge of economics is all from social studies class, my brother almost dying because insurance at first denied to pay for his surgery, and making money from yard work and fixing electronics because I am not old enough to get a legit job. I have never paid taxes, but I somewhat understand disdain towards taxation in an age where the cost of living is as high as it is relative to the amount of money one is capable of making.
chemicals are released by one part of the brain and interpreted by another. the parts of the brain that release those chemicals release it when that part of the brain is stimulated. this kind of mental stimulation can be heavily reliant on quality of life.
From what I can tell, some professionals seem to perceive it as a way to not write the easy stuff and only deal with the harder, more specific stuff that llms don't get (because they are incapable of new ideas). I don't know all the facts, but it seems as though this "home cooked software" boom will be really dull because of llm limitations. It always seems like I am actually learning something when copying code from books, maybe that is one reason why the 80s was interesting in terms of software, but what do I know, I wasn't alive.
Interesting take. Most code I see floating around on the web is either useless or a copy of something else just written in a different way. I don't think this is going to end soon, if anything, "vibe coding" will continue make it worse.
At some point, someone will start calling it out. GenZ may not as they've taken these things as granted or "way of life", but GenA might if they ever start thinking critically and out of the box.
