You choose who to follow on twitter. It's also your choice to use the AI feed vs just who you follow.
Mechahitler thing was a brief controversy that was turned off a while ago and the people I follow aren't getting spammed dumb questions to grok (although I find grok to be very good these days).
The attention seeking right wing accounts are annoyingly prevalent but it's entirely possibly to not see their content. Just like on old twitter which was full of radical politics. Curate your follow list.
Even so being a nazi or having a feed of a bunch of hitlers or whatever is 1st amendment protected political activity that won't expose your employer to a successful hostile workplace lawsuit.
Having a sexually provocative furry show up is not protected by the first amendment, since it appeals to prurient interest, someone passing by could argue they feel sexually harassed or find it hostile and have a much better chance at causing problems for your employer.
Maybe I've worked for some weird employers but if I was caught on twitter posting Nazi salutes I would expect raised eye-brows, but for the stated reasons, if I was caught with a furry picture on display where someone else could see it I'd expect to be immediately terminated.
> I was caught on twitter posting Nazi salutes I would expect raised eye-brows, but for the stated reasons, if I was caught with a furry picture on display where someone else could see it I'd expect to be immediately terminated.
Let me get this straight: you would get fired immediately for a picture that depicts a sub-culture of people that is often sexually deviant (but would include no nudity or anything in said picture), but it would be perfectly acceptable to promote a hate/terrorism group whose main purpose is to exterminate large parts of the Earth's population?
There's pretty much zero chance of a hostile workplace lawsuit succeeding for Nazi activity, political activity is the absolute strongest 1st amendment protected activity.
It is much easier to win a lawsuit on something appealing to prurient interest since the supreme court says it is not protected.
Most people don't actually care if the people involved in making their products are murderous psychopaths, as long as you aren't putting Nazi symbols in their product or something. That's why what are essentially CCP owned chinese manufacturers run by a party that tank-rolls over people wanting basic civil rights is seen as no-fucking-problem, no one gives a shit and their sales are not meaningfully impacted.
The only reason American employers care is if they're going to get sued, unless they are selling to rich people in San Francisco or something who can afford to pay more to buy something for moral reasons.
The US government is concerned about terrorism, as they have very much been in the past. The current political climate, however, specifies forms of terrorism which are seemingly acceptable, so I suppose in this case you are sadly correct. It still doesn't fail to boggle the shit out of my mind.
"Hostile" can only be enforced by the government within the bounds afforded by the constitution. The constitution as interpreted protects the right to publicly and loudly wish or celebrate death of minorities. The constitution as interpreted does not protect the right to display sexually explicit pictures to your coworkers of someone in a furry get-up.
deltadb sounds interesting. AI editors should look into letting you operate on multiple git branches simultaneously, like isolated browser tabs where the AI gen doesn't contaminate the other.
One of the reasons I find LLMs don't increase productivity much is that I can't switch branches to multitask while it's processing. Context switching isn't always useful but there's still lots of opportunities for rapidly experimenting or ticking off a couple small bugs quickly while AI takes the first pass on something more complicated.
Each "branch tab" could have a sort of TODO list or plan.
I have been running multiple instances of the Codex CLI tool in several terminals to do different stuff. You can even checkout the repo several times, write the todo to a file (or ask the agent to do so), if you need.
Turing was a pioneer in technology. The organization's mandate and reason for it's funding is as a "national institute for data science and artificial intelligence". Putting Turing's name on it doesn't mean the organization must serve primarily as a performant or symbolic role to his sexuality.
And regardless it sounds like the gender ratio is in line with STEM averages (or even above average).
> At ATI, management at the scientific leadership level referred to in the letter – people who oversee research into AI – has six women to 13 men, a split of approximately 32%-68%. The gender split among ATI’s total staff of 560 people is 53% male and 47% female.
Listing a few: Market incentives, general competency of the organizations running the systems, government procurement using the same set of bigcos who only care about getting the contract not about delivering quality after. Not that I have an opinion on paper ballots but I understand the concern for such a sensitive system.
FISA and patriot act are very controversial, the EU doing the same thing but far worse isn’t a good argument to stand on merely because the US gets talked about more on Wikipedia and therefore the press (which is one of the primary acceptable sources for a wiki article). Not to mention places like Germany and France did much of what NSA was doing back in the 2000s, often with even more leeway.
If anything censorship and extensive government oversight of peoples lives in EU and UK is far less controversial so there isn’t much of a push back. As you can see every time this comes up on HN where people in the EU defend it.
There is no evidence the heart attack gun ever existed.
Every description of it is ludicrous.
>here, researchers under Dr. Nathan Gordon, a CIA chemist, mixed shellfish toxin with water and froze the mixture into a small pellet or dart. The finished projectile would be fired from a modified Colt M1911 pistol equipped with an electrical firing mechanism. It had an effective range of 100 meters and was virtually noiseless when fired.
The device held up by Senator Frank Church was not a modified Colt M1911. It was an air pistol with absurd rifle sight attached.
That device has no mechanism for cooling the pellets. The second a frozen pellet is inserted into that device it will begin melting.
Very few handguns, to the point that "none" is accurate ENOUGH, have an effective range of more than ~50 meters. There are some calibers, not nearly-silent ice pellets, that can travel further but their ballistics out of short barrels are so poor that demos at 100 yards and beyond are exercises in exhibition and bragging rights.
No known combinations of mechanisms needed to propel a projectile 100 meters are virtually noiseless. Even air rifles that can fling a metal pellet several hundred yards as their "maximum range" but operate in 50-60 yards as their "effective range" make a shit ton of noise.
Any small dart-like ice pellet would immediately disintegrate into dust at the forces needed to travel even a fraction of 100 meters with enough energy to pierce human skinned clothing.
Any large .45 caliber ice pellet would shatter and if it struck a target with enough force to penetrate skin it would leave way more than "a tiny red dot"'s worth of signature.
Saxitoxin is not, and has never been since its isolation, undetectable. It doesn't "disappear" from the body after death (indeed
the mechanisms that would cause its distruction cease upon death) and can be detected with simple tests.
This doesn't make sense except as a distraction from things the CIA really didn't want investigators to see.
It's good to remember that these agencies do put false reports in with official docs. Some you purposefully leak to the enemy (like encourage a known mole to "find" them) and then your enemy doesn't know what's fact from fiction. You also plant false reports to detect moles because specific fantasies are only available to specific groups.
Is anyone surprised a organization focused on disinformation is... good at disinformation? I'm sure they sold tons of fantasies to Church and made the best of the situation. That Church quote (If a dictator took charge) seems like the greatest publicity the CIA could ever hope for. They wanted the Russians to be paranoid and really everyone to be paranoid. And here is a US senator saying the CIA can get you wherever you are and you'd never know? That's exactly what they want you to believe! That they are omniscient and omnipotent.
The problem I have with all these conspiracies is that they don't take a second to realize that these agencies want you to believe in conspiracies. We talk all the time about misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation yet when something fancifulness like UFOs or untraceable weapons pop up everyone is all too happy to believe. It is especially true for those who believe the government is lying to us. Why does no one ever consider that just another lie is being told? The problem with intelligence agencies is you can't believe anything they say, you need strong proof and to always be second guessing. Which is the entire point, to overload you and get you to believe a lie.
Isn't that more likely to be some kind of training mission for a junior agent? (make it personal, not totally clean and get away with it anyway?)
When they just want to make sure to kill someone, dumping a few magazines into the body and driving over it afterwards for good measure, like that ex-pilot in Spain, appears to do the trick just fine.
It shoots an ice pellet, which can stay perfectly intact for a range of 100m(!), yet leaves a “tiny red prick on the victim” (implying it’s maybe a ~1mm in diameter), yet also instantly melts when it hits the victim?
And the gun has a ginormous scope, on top of a “modified colt m1911” that was made electric? How and why would you modify a non-electric handgun with a large internal barrel for this?
piratebay/rutracker + apple tv 4k box + Infuse 8 app (which has icloud syncing of video timestamps) + a macbook/laptop with filesharing turned on = way better than buying 4 different stream services
> but only noticing one means you're closer (by varying degrees) to the other.
Maybe if you're talking about culture in general it will exist as some sort of U shape in general terms no doubt, but any hyper online subcultures turned into an IRL organization/insular collection of people like defcon is liable to go hard in identifiable directions which is distracting to more disinterested parties there for the original purpose of the show.
Mechahitler thing was a brief controversy that was turned off a while ago and the people I follow aren't getting spammed dumb questions to grok (although I find grok to be very good these days).
The attention seeking right wing accounts are annoyingly prevalent but it's entirely possibly to not see their content. Just like on old twitter which was full of radical politics. Curate your follow list.
reply