Skip to content

We Should Immediately Nationalize SpaceX and Starlink

Technology
496 196 1.9k
  • 243 Stimmen
    87 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Z
    Because they simply cannot do it otherwise.
  • 53 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    18 Aufrufe
    E
    I can already speak to my cat. It's not really an enlightening conversation it's basically him demanding food, or he wants to go outside, or he wants better food than the food provided. That's basically the extent of his conversation skills. I mean he's a cat, he's not exactly going to talk about politics with me is it even if we could translate between our "languages"
  • (LLM) A language model built for the public good

    Technology technology
    17
    1
    131 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    136 Aufrufe
    cabbage@piefed.socialC
    Large language models and "generative AI" such as Stable Diffusion, Midjourney, and DALL-E are all just machine learning models. We do not currently have a real "AI branch" of computer science, we have a branch of machine learning that poses as AI. No matter how good a machine gets at recognizing and predicting patterns, it will not constitute AI, as intelligence is different from pattern recognition and prediction. Even if LLMs can sometimes appear to be reasoning, they importantly are not.
  • 279 Stimmen
    30 Beiträge
    33 Aufrufe
    V
    Relocate those Native American to reservations because those computers need a place to live. Or something like that.
  • Signal – an ethical replacement for WhatsApp

    Technology technology
    235
    1
    1k Stimmen
    235 Beiträge
    1k Aufrufe
    V
    What I said is that smart people can be convinced to move to another platform. Most of my friends are not technically inclined, but it was easy to make them use it, at least to chat with me. What you did is change "smart people" with "people who already want to move", which is not the same. You then said it's not something you can choose (as you cannot choose to be rich). But I answered that you can actually choose your friends. Never did I say people who are not interested in niche technologies are not smart. My statement can be rephrased in an equivalent statement "people who cannot be convinced to change are not smart", and I stand to it.
  • 39 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    76 Aufrufe
    C
    I believed they were doing such things against budding competitors long before the LLM era. My test is simple. Replace it with China. Would the replies be the opposite of what you've recieved so far? The answer is yes. Absolutely people would be frothing at the mouth about China being bad actors. Western tech bros are just as paranoid, they copy off others, they steal ideas. When we do it it's called "innovation".
  • U.S.-Sanctioned Terrorists Enjoy Premium Boost on X

    Technology technology
    5
    1
    90 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    38 Aufrufe
    M
    Yeah but considering who's in charge of the government, half of us will be hit with that designation sooner or later.
  • CrowdStrike Announces Layoffs Affecting 500 Employees

    Technology technology
    8
    1
    242 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    51 Aufrufe
    S
    This is where the magic of near meaningless corpo-babble comes in. The layoffs are part of a plan to aspirationally acheive the goal of $10b revenue by EoY 2025. What they are actually doing is a significant restructuring of the company, refocusing by outside hiring some amount of new people to lead or be a part of departments or positions that haven't existed before, or are being refocused to other priorities... ... But this process also involves laying off 500 of the 'least productive' or 'least mission critical' employees. So, technically, they can, and are, arguing that their new organizational paradigm will be so succesful that it actually will result in increased revenue, not just lower expenses. Generally corpos call this something like 'right-sizing' or 'refocusing' or something like that. ... But of course... anyone with any actual experience with working at a place that does this... will tell you roughly this is what happens: Turns out all those 'grunts' you let go of, well they actually do a lot more work in a bunch of weird, esoteric, bandaid solutions to keep everything going, than upper management was aware of... because middle management doesn't acknowledge or often even understand that that work was being done, because they are generally self-aggrandizing narcissist petty tyrants who spend more time in meetings fluffing themselves up than actually doing any useful management. Then, also, you are now bringing on new, outside people who look great on paper, to lead new or modified apartments... but they of course also do not have any institutional knowledge, as they are new. So now, you have a whole bunch of undocumented work that was being done, processes which were being followed... which is no longer being done, which is not documented.... and the new guys, even if they have the best intentions, now have to spend a quarter or two or three figuring out just exactly how much pre-existing middle management has been bullshitting about, figuring out just how much things do not actually function as they ssid it did... So now your efficiency improving restructuring is actually a chaotic mess. ... Now, this 'right sizing' is not always apocalyptically extremely bad, but it is also essentially never totally free from hiccups... and it increases stress, workload, and tensions between basically everyone at the company, to some extent. Here's Forbes explanation of this phenomenon, if you prefer an explanation of right sizing in corpospeak: https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/rightsizing/