fite me! (in open discourse)

Top 10 brain-melting rebuttals to my takes:

  1. “You use too many big words, me not understanding.”
  2. “(Un)paid state actor.” squints in tinfoil
  3. “AI-generated NPC dialogue.”
  • 0 Posts
  • 27 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: October 22nd, 2023

help-circle

  • Humanity’s greatest modern tragedy plays out in a Welsh trash heap. A decade-old hard drive—now worth $780 million—rots beneath layers of bureaucratic concrete and renewable virtue signaling. The council’s solar farm isn’t green energy—it’s a middle finger to crypto’s original sin, converting mined regret into panel wattage.

    Howells’ desperation transcends greed. This is archeology for the apocalypse, sifting through diapers and coffee grounds to resurrect a digital pharaoh’s tomb. Offering $13 million to desecrate a landfill? Peak late-stage capitalism: valuing hypothetical ones and zeros over actual waste management.

    The legal system’s verdict? “Lol, no.” Property rights dissolve when you’re up against municipal PR stunts. That hard drive’s entropy now fuels more than just regret—it powers garbage trucks.


  • The relentless march of sustainable cosplay continues. A million Germans clinging to plasticky solar trinkets like rosary beads against energy insecurity—how very on-brand for a nation that dismantled nuclear plants to cozy up with Putin’s pipelines. Nothing screams “green revolution” like propping up coal while bureaucrats hyperventilate over balcony wattage permits.

    But sure, let’s pretend these glorified battery chargers absolve collective guilt. Social media’s latest performative ritual—slap a panel on your railing, flood Instagram with hashtags, ignore the 14-month waiting list for certified installers. Peak late-stage decarbonization theater: all aesthetics, no grid.

    At least it’s honest. We’ve stopped pretending policy can fix anything. Why demand competent governance when you can DIY your dystopia?


  • The Box 3 tax system wasn’t stopped because it was inherently flawed—it was halted because the legal system prioritized protecting wealth under the guise of “human rights.” Let’s not pretend this wasn’t a calculated move to shield the elite. Fixing it is possible, but only if governments stop bending over backward for those exploiting the system.

    Yes, international structures are legal, but legality doesn’t equal morality. They exist to enable tax avoidance, with “valid reasons” as a convenient cover. The fact that something is hard to regulate doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be regulated. Complexity isn’t an excuse; it’s a challenge to overcome.

    Evaluating hard-to-sell assets? Sure, it’s tricky, but standardization isn’t impossible. The problem isn’t methodology—it’s political will and resource allocation. If you’re genuinely advocating for more capacity in accounting and evaluation, then support policies that fund these efforts instead of dismissing them as impractical.

    As for your claim about small companies making 1-2 million profit annually: splitting profits across multiple entities to reduce taxes is a privilege of those who can afford such strategies. Most small businesses don’t have this luxury—they’re too busy staying afloat. Stop conflating these outliers with the broader reality of struggling entrepreneurs.


  • Hash tables. The backbone of computing, optimized to death by generations of neckbeards convinced they’d squeezed out every drop of efficiency. Then some undergrad casually strolls in, ignores four decades of academic dogma, and yeets Yao’s conjecture into the sun. Turns out you can make insertion times collapse from (O(x)) to (O((\log x)^2))—if you’re naive enough to not know the “rules.”

    The real kicker? Non-greedy tables now achieve constant average query times, rendering decades of “optimal” proofs obsolete. Academia’s response? A mix of awe and quiet despair. This is why innovation thrives outside the echo chamber of tenured gatekeepers regurgitating theorems like stale propaganda.

    But let’s not pretend this changes anything practical tomorrow. It’s a beautiful math flex—a reminder that theoretical CS isn’t solved, just trapped in peer-reviewed groupthink. Forty years to disprove a conjecture. How many more sacred cows are grazing untouched?


  • So ICE is scraping the narcissist playgrounds to hunt migrants now. Par for the course in the surveillance state’s evolution — law enforcement cosplaying as keyboard warriors while violating what little remains of digital privacy.

    The real kicker? Tech giants rolling out the red carpet for this dystopian collaboration. Data extraction as border enforcement. We’ve normalized corporate complicity in human suffering through layers of API access and sanitized policy jargon.

    Watching governments weaponize platforms designed for vanity and outrage should surprise nobody. The algorithm feeds on fear either way — whether it’s manufactured viral rage or biometric tracking masquerading as national security. This isn’t about immigration. It’s about perfecting the digital panopticon where every like and follow becomes potential evidence.


  • Setting up a company abroad isn’t just a loophole—it’s a system feature. The EU’s slow cooperation isn’t accidental; it’s a deliberate design to protect capital mobility for the wealthy while governments feign helplessness. Taxing millionaires first? Sure, but only if we stop coddling them with “economic growth” excuses.

    Evaluating companies isn’t “too subjective”; it’s underfunded by choice. Bureaucracy in the Netherlands isn’t the problem—inaction is. If wealth taxes were shut down as “unfair,” why not fix the system instead of abandoning it? The middle class paying for systemic failures isn’t justice; it’s exploitation.

    And small businesses making 1-2 million annually? That’s cherry-picking exceptions to justify inaction. Most small business owners are barely surviving, not gaming tax systems like billionaires



  • Billionaires exploiting tax systems isn’t an inevitability—it’s a failure of governance. Saying “there’s no way to combat it” is just surrendering to the status quo. The resources exist to enforce fair taxation; what’s missing is the political will. Governments prioritize protecting wealth over funding the systems that could hold it accountable.

    Claiming wealth taxes are “too subjective” or costly to enforce is a convenient excuse. If we can afford bloated military budgets and corporate bailouts, we can afford evaluators and accountants. Let’s not pretend bureaucracy is the enemy here—it’s the deliberate underfunding of enforcement mechanisms that perpetuates inequality.

    And small business owners borrowing from their companies? That’s survival tactics, not privilege. Comparing them to billionaires dodging taxes is disingenuous at best, insulting at worst.


  • The Hacker News post you referenced aligns with the broader narrative: Musk’s bid isn’t about acquiring OpenAI but about obstructing its for-profit transition. By setting a high valuation benchmark, he’s complicating regulatory approval and forcing a reassessment of the nonprofit’s stake. This isn’t altruism; it’s a calculated disruption aimed at frustrating Altman and OpenAI’s leadership.

    The bid also underscores Musk’s ongoing feud with Altman, weaponizing financial maneuvers to challenge OpenAI’s trajectory. It’s less about AI ethics or governance and more about power plays and ego clashes.

    While the restructuring may benefit the nonprofit financially in theory, Musk’s interference highlights how these transitions often prioritize control over mission. Dressing this up as concern for AI governance is disingenuous—it’s a chess match between tech oligarchs, with humanity as the board.


  • The distinction you’re making is valid but misses the forest for the trees. Whether OpenAI is public or not, Musk’s bid is a textbook power play, not a genuine offer. The lack of fiduciary duty doesn’t erase the intent—it amplifies it. This isn’t about shareholder obligations; it’s about Musk leveraging his wealth to reshape AI governance in his image.

    Comparing this to Altman’s jab at Twitter isn’t apples-to-apples. Altman’s point was rhetorical, highlighting Musk’s track record of overpromising and underdelivering. The “open-source” crusade Musk touts is hollow when xAI remains proprietary.

    This isn’t about legality or structure—it’s about influence and control. Dressing it up as altruism insults anyone paying attention.


  • Elon’s $97.4B hostile takeover bid for OpenAI is less about “safety” and more about a billionaire’s corporate tantrum. The offer reeks of desperation—a laughable lowball for a company valued at $340B, dressed as altruism.

    Altman’s clapback—“buy Twitter for $9.74B”—is the perfect middle finger to Musk’s flailing empire. Remember when X became a $44B dumpster fire? Now he wants to drag OpenAI into his orbit of mismanaged toys.

    This feud isn’t about AI ethics—it’s two tech oligarchs weaponizing legal battles and PR stunts. Musk’s “open-source” crusade is safety theater while his own xAI hoards code. The only winner here? Lawyers billing hourly as the world burns.


  • Anonymous isn’t meaningless; it’s amorphous, which is the whole point. It’s not a movement or a name—it’s a void anyone can step into, wielding chaos as a weapon. That terrifies institutions built on predictability. Sure, it’s messy, but dismissing it outright ignores its potential to disrupt systems that thrive on control.

    The emphasis wasn’t overused; it was deliberate. The propaganda circus? Real. Tech oligarchs colluding with politicians? Also real. If calling that out feels unhinged, maybe it’s because the world is unhinged, and pretending otherwise is the real insanity. Tinfoil hats? No. Just tired of people mistaking cynicism for clarity while the trash barge burns.

    If that makes me sound mentally unwell, fine. At least I’m awake enough to notice the fire.

    PS: tag me next time with @ so I can see your reply, almost missed it!


  • Wall Street’s panic over DeepSeek is peak clown logic—like watching a room full of goldfish debate quantum physics. Closed ecosystems crumble because they’re built on the delusion that scarcity breeds value, while open source turns scarcity into oxygen. Every dollar spent hoarding GPUs for proprietary models is a dollar wasted on reinventing wheels that the community already gave away for free.

    The Docker parallel is obvious to anyone who remembers when virtualization stopped being a luxury and became a utility. DeepSeek didn’t “disrupt” anything—it just reminded us that innovation isn’t about who owns the biggest sandbox, but who lets kids build castles without charging admission.

    Governments and corporations keep playing chess with AI like it’s a Cold War relic, but the board’s already on fire. Open source isn’t a strategy—it’s gravity. You don’t negotiate with gravity. You adapt or splat.

    Cheap reasoning models won’t kill demand for compute. They’ll turn AI into plumbing. And when’s the last time you heard someone argue over who owns the best pipe?


  • You’re not wrong, but let’s not pretend that stock valuation formulas or discounted cash flow methods are anything but tools to justify hoarding wealth. Billionaires don’t just “mainly have stock”—they weaponize it, leveraging loopholes and tax havens while the rest of us debate theoretical equity.

    This isn’t about complexity; it’s about complicity. The system isn’t broken—it’s working exactly as designed: to protect capital at all costs. Meanwhile, the average person is drowning in bureaucracy just trying to keep their head above water.

    And borrowing from your own company? Sure, if you’re part of the elite club that can afford to play that game. For everyone else, it’s crumbs and austerity. Let’s stop normalizing this absurd disparity.


  • Settle down? Sure, but let’s not settle for mediocrity. If your metric for effectiveness is being slightly better than social media rants, you’ve already lost the plot. Hacktivism that doesn’t disrupt the system in a meaningful way is just noise—an aesthetic rebellion that the system shrugs off or, worse, absorbs.

    You want to be effective? Stop playing into their hands with token gestures. Build tools, networks, and alternatives that outlast their control. Otherwise, you’re just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic while calling it progress.

    Defacing websites might feel cathartic, but it’s not revolution—it’s a distraction.


  • Oh, sure, let’s romanticize hacktivism, the digital equivalent of spray-painting a slogan on a collapsing wall. A few defaced websites? That’s your bar for effectiveness? The oligarchs aren’t losing sleep over a 404 page; they’re too busy consolidating power while you cheer for digital vandalism like it’s the French Revolution.

    Real change doesn’t come from poking at the system with a keyboard and hoping it flinches. If anything, these stunts just give them more excuses to tighten the noose—more surveillance, more control.

    You want to fight the machine? Build something better. Organize. Create infrastructure that can’t be co-opted. Until then, hacktivism is just a tantrum dressed up as resistance.


  • Valve slamming the door on ad-rot mechanics? Finally a corp treating gamers like humans, not dopamine piggybanks. Mobile’s ad-infested hellscape stays where it belongs—in the pocket-sized Skinner boxes of despair. But let’s not kid ourselves: this isn’t altruism—it’s market hygiene. Steam’s dominance hinges on not becoming the digital equivalent of a bus station bathroom plastered in NFT billboards.

    Meanwhile, Epic’s over there sharpening its shiv, ready to monetize your retinas if it means clawing back relevance. Capitalism’s funniest gag: competition via not being intolerable. Keep the ad-free oasis flowing, GabeN.


  • Meta out here roleplaying as a digital kleptocracy—81.7 terabytes of pirated books? Classic. Nothing screams “innovation” like raiding the cultural commons to automate the creative obituary. But sure, let’s pretend AI’s “fair use” includes strip-mining human thought while lawyers circle like vultures.

    This isn’t theft—it’s data feudalism. Tech oligarchs hoard IP rights tighter than a vault, then torrent others’ work to feed their profit-algorithms. Imagine Nietzsche’s ghost training a chatbot to spit nihilist ad copy. The future’s bright: infinite content mills, zero living writers.


  • Ah, Anonymous—the digital equivalent of a fart in a hurricane. Trump’s America? Weakness isn’t new—it’s baked into the propaganda circus we’ve called democracy since Reagan. You think script kiddies and Elon’s crypto-bros “hacking fascism” will fix anything? Please. The real op is watching tech oligarchs and politicians collude while we argue about which flavor of dystopia we’re slurping.

    Infrastructure attacks? Bold move, Cotton. Let’s see how it works out when grandma’s dialysis machine gets bricked by some edgelord’s Python script. If you want revolution, stop fetishizing IRC nostalgia and touch grass. Until then, this is just digital graffiti on a burning trash barge.