Comments by "SmallSpoonBrigade" (@SmallSpoonBrigade) on "Lex Clips" channel.

@latenightcake1147 It's more or less the safest thing they have for communicating online. It's something that the US spies use for communicating with informants. But, really, nothing is truly safe if you're doing something that's interesting enough to the wrong people.
26
Rand isn't even good on paper. Anybody that's actually bothered to read Marx would know that he actually marveled over the accomplishments of capitalism pretty explicitly. Where he had significant issues was the tendency of the owner class to treat the workers like equipment or work animals. A system where the owners owned the factories and businesses, but everything else was done in a capitalist market based way would be consistent with hiss beliefs, but still be nearly entirely what we've got from a practical perspective.
15
@los1wochos Tor comes from the US intelligence agencies in order to shield operatives spread throughout the world. Making it easier to crack makes it harder to get that information. But, making it harder to crack also means more illegal activities using it. It's not a very easy problem to solve, but for the most part, it's not like there aren't other ways of sharing encrypted data without it. Its just more convenient.
7
Unfortunately? The thinking is of low quality and the conclusions are sketchy at best. I see no reason to ban the books, but I do think that exposure to them is really only valuable in the sense that we should have exposure to various ideas, even if they're clearly fatally flawed.
6
@thomasjones53 I think that's the problem. People read it without the education or critical thinking to really get what's on the page, and so they view it as being this magical writing. The reality though is that Galt's Gulch is a cartoonish and extremely naive view of what that really was when it existed. A society where people are just doing their own thing tends to break down due to people getting into conflicts and the less desirable things not being done without some degree of force or bribe to make it happen.] In some respects it's a beautiful idea, but it's incredibly naive to think that is possible without infinite supplies of resources and people to put a higher premium on cooperation than following a leader.
5
One of the primary jobs of sales is to find out what the customer needs and then giving it to them. Sometimes it involves explaining to the customer why a different solution is a better fit for what they wanted.
3
Possibly, but people keep trying to replace it and there's been extremely limited success in doing so. The install base is just too large and it's just too good at what it does to attract the kind of talent and energy necessary to replace it. Most of the alternatives wind up having the same basic problems anyways. Plus, JavaScript today isn't he nightmare it was in the '90s where just about anything you wanted to do would require testing to see which browser was running the code and doing something different from whichever browser needed accomodations.
2
How do you manage scale and speed without efficiency? Saying that you want scale and speed without efficiency doesn't make much sense.
2
Anything can be quantified if you try hard enough. Yes, some things will be more subjective than others, but everything can be quantified.
1
@TheIronpusher Smart is definitely not a word I would put to law enforcement. There's a reason why they mainly catch the dummies and have to falsify terrorist plots in order to catch any terrorists at all.
1
He is, but keep in mind that the standards back then were higher. Just look at the various postmortem videos on major games from the '80s and early '90s.
1
The real reason is that they aren't interested in paying for code that works as advertised without numerous bugs. Fixing bugs is always a lot harder to get funded than new features. Even in opensource there's often far more interest in new features with bugs being mostly fixed by programmers that are either being hurt by them, or who have a passion for the project.
1
@digiryde Even without those moments at the end of the day, you're trying to code something that runs the way that you want it to run. Even if what you're doing is theoretically correct, it doesn't much matter if there's some sort of bug in the compiler that does something you weren't wanting.
1
@publicacct5626 If you've got it set up where you have to run the entire thing at once in order to debug it, then you've got a problem. And yes, of course there are things that are going to pop up at scale that wouldn't be a problem with smaller scale builds, but if you haven't fixed those smaller scale builds and deployments, then why would you assume that a larger deployment isn't going to have massive problems?
1
The reason why is that she's incompetent and her books have been used to indoctrinate generations of people into the idea that fascism is good and the government doing things for the people is bad. People latch onto it like it's a good idea, but lack both the education and the critical thinking to recognize that we've been there before. That was like what much of the US, and really world, were like before the invention of regulatory agencies and the like. We have those institutions and those limitations on freedom because not having them was terrible. There are countless history books that one can choose to read to understand just how bad her ideology was. At least with Marx, he recognized that if we simply prevented 3rd parties from owning businesses, we could still get nearly all the advantages of capitalism without treating people like cogs to be worn down and used up.
1
I don't know if he could. Most of the projects that made him famous were from relatively small teams. I get the feeling that VR at Meta is a much larger enterprise.
1
@johnjay6370 I'm not surprised, we're nowhere near the point where that's solved. You're trying to get the brain to think that things are the distance they appear, but your eyes are focused on a point that's much closer. Unless some new technology comes along that changes it, you're likely to always have the issue of the eyeballs being focused at a different distance than where they're pointed. It's been a problem for decades and may be an issue for decades more. I'd wager that you'd need something along the lines of contact based imaging to have any hope of it working.
1