ArchRecord

joined 9 months ago
[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 12 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Wanting to deport someone for the color of their skin is fundamentally racist, because immigration, broadly, is a victimless crime.

What is "illegal" is not necessarily always immoral, and with the evidence we have available to us surrounding the effects of immigration, they create more jobs, spend more in the economy, produce more tax revenue, do less crime, and take less benefits.

Deporting "illegals" harms the economy, breaks apart communities, and punishes people for a victimless crime, all because some people are afraid that their neighbor might have a little more pigment in their skin, or use different words sometimes.

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

My wishful hope is that because some of the effects (i.e. prices after blanket tariffs) will be so demonstrably bad for their wellbeing, and will appear much quicker, rather than being delayed (i.e. inflation) that they will actually notice that their own side did something bad, and maybe the more moderate, single-issue voters (primarily those on the economy) will wise up and vote against them in 2028.

If we even have an election in 2028, that is.

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It's exactly this.

Trump promised easy solutions to the problems caused by the right, and by corporate oligarchs. They went along with it, and voted for him. They're now in for a wild ride.

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I’m excited for the future, but not as excited for the transition period.

I have similar feelings.

I discovered LLMs before the hype ever began (used GPT-2 well before ChatGPT even existed) and the same with image generation models barely before the hype really took off. (I was an early closed beta tester of DALL-E)

And as my initial fascination grew, along with the interest of my peers, the hype began to take off, and suddenly, instead of being an interesting technology with some novel use cases, it became yet another technology for companies to show to investors (after slapping it in a product in a way no user would ever enjoy) to increase stock prices.

Just as you mentioned with the dotcom bubble, I think this will definitely do a lot of good. LLMs have been great for asking specialized questions about things where I need a better explanation, or rewording/reformatting my notes, but I've never once felt the need to have my email client generate every email for me, as Google seems to think I'd want.

If we can just get all the over-hyped corporate garbage out, and replace it with more common-sense development, maybe we'll actually see it being used in a way that's beneficial for us.

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 10 points 6 days ago

Yes, yes it does.

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 21 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I understand why people seem to think we should tolerate these views, because "muh free speech," but to them, I say:

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago

IPFS seems similar to what you're looking for.

(See: A copy of Wikipedia on IPFS being censorship-resistant, and globally distributed)

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

I like ArchiveBox, but in my experience, it kept on running into issues saving pages, and stopped functioning after it worked the first few times. I really wish there was a more streamlined application that did a similar thing somewhere out there.

I've been looking at Linkwarden's page archiving solution, but it crashes whenever I try importing any large number of links, so that's a bust too.

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 35 points 1 week ago

Reminds me of this great street art I saw posted at some point. Can't find the source though.

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 11 points 1 week ago

And anyone who hurts his feelings, and queer people, and college students, of course.

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 5 points 2 weeks ago

That's definitely true, I probably should have been a little more clear in my response, specifying that it can run at startup, but doesn't always do so.

I'll edit my comment so nobody gets the wrong idea. Thanks for pointing that out!

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 102 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (8 children)

To put it very simply, the 'kernel' has significant control over your OS as it essentially runs above everything else in terms of system privileges.

It can (but not always) run at startup, so this means if you install a game with kernel-level anticheat, the moment your system turns on, the game's publisher can have software running on your system that can restrict the installation of a particular driver, stop certain software from running, or, even insidiously spy on your system's activity if they wished to. (and reverse-engineering the code to figure out if they are spying on you is a felony because of DRM-related laws)

It basically means trusting every single game publisher with kernel-level anticheat in their games to have a full view into your system, and the ability to effectively control it, without any legal recourse or transparency, all to try (and usually fail) to stop cheating in games.

 

This site is less useful, more... strange.

Anything you never wanted to know about bread bag clips can be found on HORG.

 

Sharing because I found this very interesting.

The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective has a DIY design for a home lab you can set up to reproduce expensive medication for dirt cheap, producing medication like that used to cure Hepatitis C, along with software they developed that can be used to create chemical compounds out of common household materials.

 

I'm someone who believes landlording (and investing in property outside of just the one you live in) is immoral, because it makes it harder for other people to afford a home, and takes what should be a human right, and turns it into an investment.

At the same time, It's highly unlikely that I'll ever be able to own a home without investing my money.

And just investing in stocks means I won't have a diversified portfolio that could resist a financial crash as much as real estate can.

If I were to invest fractionally in real estate, say, through REITs, would it not be as immoral as landlording if I were to later sell all my shares of the REIT in order to buy my own home?

I personally think investing in general is usually immoral to some degree, since it relies on the exploitation of other's labour, but at the same time, it feels more like I'm buying back my own lost labour value, rather than solely exploiting others.

I'm curious how any of you might see this as it applies to real estate, so feel free to discuss :)

view more: next ›