No, they're verifiable as having been signed by a key. You can still call yourself "Michael Jackson's Ghost". This is the only identity verification people care about, the big bad "send us proof you are who you say you are" gate.
If you do all the stuff (DKIM etc) AND you're not on a banned IP, you're fine. It seems like this person couldn't find a non-banned IP. I know plenty of people who self host email and successfully send to Gmail.
Yep. Know plenty of selfhosters who run email successfully. In fact, with all the email in a box packages out there, it's never been easier to self-host emails. One recommendation for those who are interested, is to choose a reputable VPS host with clean IP:s.
"Take some ordinary, off-the-shelf servers. Treat them as dumb, untrusted pipes. Their job is just to relay information. They don’t own the keys—you own your keys. You sign messages with your key, then post them to one or more relays. Other users follow one or more relays. When they get a message, they use your key to verify you sent it. That’s it!"
There are way ways past this, from religion and Amish-style cultural approaches, to legal prohibition of making and selling and using it, to dictatorial control of the companies which could make it, to individuals being personally immune, to paying people money if they don't use it. Like there are people who avoid alcohol, opioids, heroin, all other wireheading-style drugs and experiences that exist already, and people who do exercise and stay thin in a world of fast food and cars.
A great filter needs to apply to every civilisation imaginable, no exceptions, nerfing billions of species before they get to a higher Kardashev scale, not just something that "could happen" or the latest “Dunning-Kruger” mic-drop in every thread. In 1960s "the great filter is nuclear war", in 1890 "the great filter is heroin", in 1918 "the great filter is world war, we are destined to destroy ourselves", in 2015 "the great filter is climate change our emissions will end us like bacteria in a petri dish", in antiquity "the great filter is the punishment for crossing the will of the Gods".
It's got to be something you cannot get around even if you try really really hard and get very very lucky, because there are ~200,000,000,000 stars in the Milky Way and with those numbers there will be some species which lucks its way past almost any candidate, spreads out and in a mere 100k years is all over this galaxy leaving rocket trails and explosion signatures and radio signals and terraforming signs and megastructures.
This is the kind of thing that's so impressive that if you're not an (experienced) SWE you think "man LLMs are the future, and I am making some major decisions based on this". But you look at the code, and it's essentially gluing three.js and some DB stuff together. There's no lobby, no real interaction logic, no physics apart from what you get from three.js, chatting, commands, map editing, game modes.
In other words, this is slop. We know these new models can generate slop images, text, videos, and code. Sometimes slop can be useful; maybe you can shape it into something useful, maybe you can slop a slopper. But we're learning it's not economical--this is some of the costliest slop we've ever made.
This is the job a junior developer may deliver in their first weeks at a new job, so this is the way it should be treated as: good intentions, not really good quality.
AI coding needs someone behind to steer it to do better, and in some cases, it does. But still hasn't left the junior phase, and while that doesn't happen, there's still the need for a good developer to deliver good results.
There's no serious company who would do anything equivalent to "hey Jr Dev make me a Counterstrike", so examples like these do way more harm than good, because they give the impression of superpowers but this is really just the best they can do.
They're not thinking or reasoning or understanding. It's just amazing autocomplete. Humans not being able to keep themselves from extrapolating or gold rushing doesn't change that.
They are. I know a lot of people don't want to admit this, but they are. They're getting better with each release.
> But we're learning it's not economical--this is some of the costliest slop we've ever made.
Huh? How on earth would you know whether my usage of LLM's has been worth it or not?
> Sometimes slop can be useful; maybe you can shape it into something useful
Man, I just spent the last 2 weeks with a CEO who got a Bolt.new subscription to be able to generate some high-level mocks ups for me to utilize that just saved us months of back and forth.
You know what's the best part? Those same mockups can be used to gather user feedback with a functioning UI without me having to spend weeks building it and it ending up wrong anyway.
Sometimes it irks me, but now I've sorta come to embrace devs like you. You're guaranteeing I have a job because you refuse to acknowledge the very obvious thing that's happening.
We're not disagreeing. Your best example is throwaway mocks: temporary slop, which these models are good at, but all the costs and externalities are hidden from you. They're not actually economical to use (even if you don't consider training etc as part of the cost, which is ridiculous as they're some of the costliest things humans have ever done).
Yes, if you look at a photo of the X220 lid, what looks like a cosmetic accent across the lid near screen-top is actually a seam, between the nice alloy traditional lid, and some plastic that's barely held on, painted to look the same. Even minor impact can break the little plastic screw hole tabs that hold the screen-top edge of the lid. Absolutely not what you want from a ThinkPad, which has a legacy of being durable.
A disappointing thing about this is that someone changed the design, to this, to be more fragile and non-ThinkPad. In this way, it's similar to the series of regression changes to the keyboard, and now the TrackPoint.
Dunno if you listen to Ezra Klein but he had an anthropologist on once who described this tribe of humans who when someone came back having bagged big game, they had to run a gauntlet of everyone else downplaying their accomplishment like "that's not that big, your father caught bigger", and "maybe one day you'll bring down an adult deer" etc. The whole idea was like, egomaniacs are pretty bad, and they had a cultural defense against it.
I often think a weakness of liberal, western society is the insistence on rationality, that like the hunter in question could just easily put their abilities and accomplishments alongside those of others and get a pretty accurate picture. This is super untrue; we need systems to guard against our frailties, but we can't admit we have them, so we keep falling into the same ditches.
> Dunno if you listen to Ezra Klein but he had an anthropologist on once […]
Klein wrote a book a few years ago on the topic of polarization, human's inclination towards clan/tribal thinking, and how it manifests itself in (US) politics:
Maybe this is a stupid question, but is there any downside to harvesting heat from the planet? Would we slow convections by cooling it and then cause some weird ass problem?
reply