> Secondly, constantly berating him for having the wrong opinions and not explaining why those opinions are wrong are more likely to entrench his positions and anyone that is sympathetic to those opinions.
I do indeed accuse him of being a pseudo-intellectual troll, and that is the kindest interpretation of things he has actually written, including “As I Remember London”, which is creepy, deliberately misleading, has clear white-nationalist subtext and openly supports a crooked bigoted thug.
Nope, sorry. There are things in that article that are really a long way beyond having been deceived. They cannot and must not be minimised in that way. And nobody who criticises them should feel any blame if he doubles down; he is a wealthy privileged white man who is solely responsible for the things he says.
> There are things in that article that are really a long way beyond having been deceived
I don't believe so. Can you explain exactly how it is impossible he is deceived?
> They cannot and must not be minimised in that way.
Why not? To me what I described is what fits 100%. You just asserting that is the case hasn't explained why I might be incorrect.
You clearly haven't taken what I've explained to you on board at all. I suggest you bother checking out any of how this occurs in any other conspiracy circles, e.g., UFOs or just watching something that promotes conspiracy theories, such as Hunting Hitler (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5248878/). It's the same mechanism, just a different form.
> And nobody who criticises them should feel any blame if he doubles down; he is a wealthy privileged white man who is solely responsible for the things he says.
I am not saying people should feel blame for criticising him. I am saying that should be blamed for brow-beating him.
Are you telling me he cannot be deceived because he is wealthy? Plenty of wealthy and privileged people are/have been deceived.
I am not going to waste my time watching videos about UFO nuts to try to gain insight into why what DHH said about London is somehow a result of him being deceived and not his own fully formed opinions that he affirmed by deliberately writing them in his blog.
All you are telling me is that you are going to be wilfully ignorant. That is intellectually dishonest.
Constantly reiterating that he can't have been deceived when I've told you how it happens to people and there are similar examples elsewhere is being an ignoramus.
Is he, or is he not, fully responsible for the words in his blog that he wrote a year ago and has not amended or corrected despite very clear corrections of his misstatements of fact? (This is not even the only article where he has done that)
I don’t really give a crap if he was deceived, or how much pushback he gets, or whether he feels trapped by his own actions. He’s a big boy, he wrote what he wrote.
What he wrote is xenophobic pseudo intellectual nonsense tinged with white nationalist tropes, in support of a crook and a thug, and he is a fully grown man who is responsible for his own words on a commercial blogging platform he runs. He has access to all the same sources of information anyone else has.
You can call me names all you like but I think it’s kind of weird that you would go to bat for him like this.
What I find strange is that you said specifically that he couldn't have been deceived and then described Tommy Robinson as a crook. Your internal logic isn't consistent.
What I am trying to explain to you is that this may not be because he is some sort of unrepentant racist. It happens because it is partly a reaction to people like you who are preachy and moralistic and due to him listening to the wrong people after his worldview is rocked.
DHH probably sees the information you are referring to as being manipulated because he has been deceived. He literally doesn't believe that, so arguing from that starting point is completely pointless.
I've fallen down the political/conspiracy rabbit hole myself. I've seen it happen to other people. So I can empathise with someone else doing the same. Just because he has money doesn't mean he is immune to this.
The fact that you are unwilling to even bother entertaining any explanations is a moral failing on your part.
> You can call me names all you like but I think it’s kind of weird that you would go to bat for him like this.
You were unwilling to bother doing some basic investigation. This is quite frankly unacceptable tbh, especially after you expressed such strong views. That is being wilfully ignorant.
Also, there is nothing weird about what I am saying at all. I suspect, like others have done to me, you just want to call me a secret fascist simply because I don't want to condemn someone because they have expressed an unpopular viewpoint.
I am also fed up of this being brought up every time the project is mentioned. I am not the only one that is fed up of this sort of stuff. Recently I had two friends fall out recently over the Russo-Ukraine war. One of them simply said, "Look, dude, I don't care, I am bored of hearing it." The other lost the plot. I've also said this to some people I know someone on the right when they start going on about woke shite and leave our convo group after we said "I don't care about this stuff".
Yes! The way it tries to be smart about what you actually wanted to press but has certain areas that are exceptions to that rule — like space bar — drives me crazy.
I've deactivated every single type of data in Spotlight except Applications. It goes out of its way to still suggest files like C system files or header files, like "system_library.c". It didn't wait for AI to turn against us.
I was trying to see what happens here. It does give the Sound settings panel as the first hit. But when I then press Return, it opens System Settings, but does not actually go to the Sound settings, but General.
Also, search inside the Settings app has been broken for many releases now. I always wonder if anyone inside Apple is actually using macOS or iOS.
This is a great thought experiment bc it raises the question of WHY humans wouldn’t behave this way. IMO the answer is a lot of socially enforced incentives that are dynamic and would be tough to fully articulate in a prompt.
The white hat has their own liability to consider, and the liability of their employer. Reputation and relationships are a big factor. All these tie into fundamental human incentives: survival, community acceptance, safety and freedom (prison not preferred!).
It’s a good sketch of why alignment is difficult, at least when it’s conceived of as an attempt to match human behavior.
See, I'm keeping my siidebar open most of the time, so I WANT it to cover the content that would otherwise be visible - said no one ever.
But yay, it's centered relative to the window now! God forbid the user tiles their windows, because it breaks the aesthetic the website author intended.
The internet has become so imbalanced in favor of what the website owner wants to run on my machine. I've still not found a reliable way of modifying user-hostile React pages. I'm sure before long it will take custom builds to avoid custom CSS being blocked by anti-tamper measures.
I think it holds true throughout if you scope it to knowledge about your reports’ domain. If you’re managing managers you should have a good handle on what a manager does and different ways to do it.
It seems like one reasonable response from game companies is to include a service agreement with all games that explicitly limits the guaranteed server uptime. Ie “buying this game only guarantees operation until Dec 31 2028”
No clue if the market will go for that but it would meet the issue head on. “Companies will provide server binaries” on the other hand feels like pure fantasy.
Overall I’m glad folks are trying to do something about this.
If they did that, people would notice, it would be talked about, and it would be factored into (some) people's decisions on whether the game was worth the price. That's the market figuring out how to appropriately price a good based on information about it, which I think would be good. Even if that's the only thing this legislation changes I think it would be a good change, by forcing what was an ambiguous aspect of the good you purchased into a well understood and legally enforced aspect.
This is so cool. The discussion section [0] does a good job of explaining where this fits in, scientifically, but all I can think of is spies sending messages encoded in a piece of scotch tape.
This is not about digging up some old careless post. It’s about his current views which he posts proudly online.
I’ll note your post pulls a classic trick:
- these views are not that important to who he is
- anyway even if he did hold those views it’s not that big of a deal
- but also I agree with those views (even tho I am but a humble, reasonable centrist)
reply