Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Nasrudith's commentslogin

Manufactured consent as a notion always felt like projection to me because of its advocates. As it was a notion pushed by people who insist they know "the interests" of people who are "voting wrong". All the while disregarding the fact that if we could rely on others knowing the interests of others better than others then aristocracy would be a superior system as the nobles being more educated would know the interests of the peasantry better.

So do you believe that propaganda doesn't exist, or doesn't work, or that only ever accurately shows the truth? Because as I see it you must believe that people cannot be misled by propaganda to deny the possibility of manufactured consent.

The most important question: can both factions lose here?

Maintaining a 'mental RAM Cache' is a powerful tool to understanding the system as a whole on a deep and intuitive level, even if you can only 'render' sections at a time. The bigger it is the more you can keep track of to be able to foresee interactions between distant pieces.

It shouldn't be your only source of a plan as you'd likely wind up dropping something, but figuring out how to jiggle things around before getting it 'on paper' is something I've found helpful.


Following the RAM analogy, this sounds like saving files only in RAM, instead of creating the files in the file system, persisted on disk, and then caching it in RAM.

Personally, for me without writing or sketching I cannot think complex things: as in complex logic, constraints, etc.

I guess this is topic too abstract, so we can read into it different things.


What do we want? Meaningless preventable toil! When do we want it? Now!

Nobody wants meaningless preventable toil. What people want is a living. Nobody would be afraid of AI taking their jobs if it didn’t mean that they’d get fired.

Clothes are meaningless?

Do you mean real hand-crafted clothes, not soulless machine-weaved rags?

It isn't AI generated it is just plain a vacuous cliche. Seriously what is with people who think 'they can always tell it is AI' when really AI is living rent free in their head and they fixate on anything they don't like and are oh so convinced it must be the AI they hate. They're exactly like Fundamentalists and the devil. Or Communists and how they think capitalism literally intentionally created everything as harmful as possible just to spite them.

Holy mother of ai psychosis


Listen, if they actually had the ability to detect bots perfectly just from owning a big tech company, then we wouldn't need spam filters. Perfect bot detection would be a very valuable product. It is one thing to hold responsibility to those with power, it is another to ask the literally impossible of them.

> Perfect bot detection

Detection doesn't have to be anywhere near perfect to be effective, though I expect that they can do it pretty well at this point. Remember they have visibility into far more than users do.

> we wouldn't need spam filters

? Spam filters rely on spam detection, and do a sufficient job.


It is important to remember that meritocracy isn't a binary, it is a spectrum. Just having exams based upon literacy and ability to understand poetry about flowers for bureaucratic positions that do paperwork is more meritocratic than just a literal aristocracy and ensures literacy, but it still isn't necessarily the most relevant ability to actual ability to perform the job. Then there is the question if office politics qualify as actual job skill or is just a derailment of merit.

Furthermore there are complications with unequal resources and means of training. Not just from some families having more money, but also from more knowledge. Children who are read to are more likely to be literate, family businesses, and all that. The unequal resources raises deeper questions about what is the origin of merit.

The real world is messy like that.


Creating huge inequalities among people as opposed to highlighting them? Seriously? That doesn't sound like something derived from reasoning, it sounds like rationalization from feelings first.

We have health codes and regulations to prevent commercialization of food production in potentially substandard conditions. It prevents both good and bad things.

now that is absolutely terrible isnt it, if a person wants to start a cloud kitchen even at home, they should be able to do so unless it causes a disturbance to neighbors. as long as regular inspections can be arranged, this should be a non issue for starters. i have a feeling the BIG FOOD industry has rigged this section of the law so that their authority on ultra processed food is not challenged

Pro Tip: You're going to need a floor drain in your kitchen as a first step.

The frog in those experiments had its brain destroyed first. Just saying.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: