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

I think beeing in this kind of bubble for to long, automatically generates the perspective that you are the center of attention for the whole universe.

My grandfather had a nanny/servant, who had to do whatever the spoiled brat asked for. The result was a person, who automatically assumes that all other beeings have not meaning or intent and are in dire need of beeing pupeteered.

Its the sort of disgusting human beeing you regularly find to be CEO. Its one of the reasons they are also so fascinated with art- because art can not be created by pupeteering- as they are usually quite unimaginative.


Or you write sunny day code and wonder why everyboy elses code is riddled with those strange defensive structures.


Only slightly related, but imagine, if you take a huge server rack- and you insert hidden behind the front - a glas jar with a silicon-brain, into which tons of glowing wires run.

I want to hear the maintenance calls for that one.


Hey, this was marked as dead. Looks like you've been shadowbanned. Most of your recent comments look quite ok.


What really is horrible here is the asymmetry of cost- the development of stealth technology costed billions and took from drawinboard to reliable implemenetation close to half a century.

And it seems that detection is always easier and cheaper. I wonder wether radar and quantum "noise"-bombs that basically spam the enemy detection methods would be a cheaper approach.


"quantum noise bombs"... this wont work as the photons that hit the receiver wont be entangled with the one you sent out... This makes it potentially un-jammable in that sense.

Of course, overloading the receiver may be an attack worthy of investigating.


> What really is horrible here is the asymmetry of cost

That's the fate of most military technologies throughout history, why would stealth be different?


Spam the enemy with thousands of drones.


Well, because its really easy to raise concern. On everything. So the really concerning parts drown in the background noise of people protecting there lifes against every single step they take.

Hierarchical systems, are mostly humming all day long with people trying to save there asses. Which generates systems that are deaf to real dangers,thus making hierarchical company structure a inherent source of risk and dangers.


I dread the world that people like you aspire to.

A thousand foxholes with legal snipers each out to get one another.

All that, so one grumpy webdesigner can live from glueing together some 2nd tier stockfootage.

I licensend all my content under the GPL and similar Licenses.

I wish there was a way to seperate that hell of a internet you want to live in from the web i work to archieve every day.

I work hard on my hobby, but i do not feel entitled too money for it.


> I licensend all my content under the GPL

GPL requires copyright law to work. Without vigorous copyright law the GPL is worthless.

If you don't believe in copyright you should pick a different licence.


Its not the copyright, its the chilling effect of not visible copyright. This encasing of the whole web and everything on it with a invisible alarm-field for the users.

You may not send radiowaves. You may not distill your own alcohol, you may not do this, you may not do that. Let the professionals handle it. This is where some self-important case like the Taxi-drivers starts to enshrine a often trivial task to demand entry dutys and guild taxes.

I want you to clearly sign your content - so that is unreusable and nobody gets put out in the court to statuate a exemple, so that a useless caste of professinal may life from the fear of the comoners.


> I work hard on my hobby, but i do not feel entitled too money for it.

It's not that simple. What is just a hobby for you might be a source of income for someone else. You can't turn tables around and say they can't make money only because you don't expect a payment for your hobby.


You can not put up minefields and fences on public property to protect your lifestyle by making everyone life in constant fear.

I wish there was some way to mark such hostile silo-parts of the web against the allmende, original web.


I will give you an example. There are two people creating code, both working hard. One creates closed software, the other is creating open source. They both spend hundreds of hours on their projects. Imagine someone steals the closed source program and posts it on the web. Would you then talk about minefield, fences and living in constant fear? This simply makes no sense.

Before using an image for anything, I always check its license. It's so easy nowadays! Filtering by license is now part of Google Image search, so you don't even have to visit specialized sites like in the old days. Everything someone created is copyrighted and you can't just use it as you want, unless the creator allows you to - and many people do. It's so simple. They should teach these things early at school so we wouldn't have problems like the owner of the website in question.


You get snake-phobia and survive.

You get a addictive behaviour and slowly immunize yourself with microdoses of poison.

You hunt your prey in a poison diluting or neutralizing environment.

You set the plains on fire with dryd grass to interrupt the feeding cycle of the plague and eat the denatured poisonous creatures.

There are a lot of different strategies. One must admire the crows for eating the fugu though.


We're talking snakes here, and another animals that aren't really sentient. They aren't microdosing themselves with poison or setting fires.


I know sentience is an abused word, but for almost any of its practical definitions that's a false statement.

Sentience is the ability for subjective experience, which applies to any of the animals being discussed here. If you're thinking of something like self-awareness (a totally separate quality), you're probably correct. But that has nothing to do with the ability to learn.


I think the author of the comment you're replying to conflated sentience with sapience.


Since we're discussing snakes, wouldn't that be 'serpience'?


Those actions can still be done unintentionally. For example, a particular kind of snake can prefer to eat some particular kind of fruit when they are young, which also happens to be the favourite plant for a cane toad to rub on to get rid of itchy bottoms.


Perhaps you mean sapient. Snakes and other animals are definitely sentient.


https://pickle.nine.com.au/2018/01/10/08/46/australian-birds...

There are sources for addiction regarding animals on the web. Its quite interesting what horses and goats do for some weeds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River_toad#Drug_use_o...

The war on Horse-Drugs should have priority. Give the DEAs some hoes to whack out the danger.


Pretty cool link on the Colorado River toad. Apparently raccoons use the same strategy as these crows, turning the toad over on its back and eating the belly.


How about fixed size stacks- with a canary of a expansionfunction at the top? That way you can have it both- the speed and fixed size- and expandability on demand- by simply checking for the canary in a pattern and executing it ..


The problem here is the market distorting the incentives to the point that car-manufacturers have a interest that thieves create artifical demand backed by insurance money. Which the insurarers then transfer to the consumer, a circle that amounts to a hidden price raise for cars via insurrance, and contains nothing of value for the user of the product.


Well, at least its not recording your every stroke, to sell that as "mind-reading" info to advertisers.

How, should we call it when software regresses. Its not bloat- its worser.


Updegrade?


Will call it that from now on.. this is awesome


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

Search: