You racists are all pathetic. Trump won't make your life better in any way, and once he is gone you will have nothing. You are not going to be the celebrated figures of even the near future.
I've been going on about how ChatGPT Work (and Cowork) are missed opportunities for knowledge workers, and to illustrate that take a look at Google's NotebookLM answering the same question as ChatGPT Work, with the same 70+ files.
It centers process & sources, not just outputs.
@roanoke_gal@ramez I am Australian and we do not have a police state. As per my comment to the OP, most people on Earth simply don't share your moral intuitions so you're going to have to actually make an argument rather than gesturing to things that don't exist, such as Australian police states.
@roanoke_gal@ramez I'm sorry, but even with that clarification I don't understand how civilians using language models to help kill their nearest and dearest helps.
@ramez Why? (To be clear I'm not an American, so like most people on Earth I don't share your intuitions, so you'll have to actually make a consequentialist argument that makes sense)
@roanoke_gal@ramez So because a theocratic government is killing people with the help of a technology, civilians in western countries should be able to use the same technology to help them kill people?
@hndlehndlekyun@alz_zyd_ This is true but Vance wouldn't be able to say this stuff so easily if Economists were better at public comms (and education imo) and there was broader understanding of their work
I don't agree with the attacks on individuals in this post, but I think this is a pretty important point about how Twitter YIMBYism risks becoming detatched from reality about how easy it is to steamroll opponents of development and dismiss their objections.
I didn't realise that there had been a backlash to @dc_lawrence's post the other day, which I thought made good points, and a lot of it seems to be based on a fantasy that you can just choose to dismiss the opinions of a large majority of voters and "just pass some laws" that they hate.
I think that's obviously mistaken, and even though I think a lot of the arguments made against new development in the UK *are* actually pretexts for other objections, these other objections are still extant and require solutions.
https://t.co/ZnGssp1J5c
To the extent that critics of economics overlook the purpose of assumptions in modeling, defenders can make the same mistake in their deference. The critique in question, with respect to quality and price, is certainly subject to vast amounts of economic research, but quality is nevertheless treated as an assumption behind many of the headline figures because the aggregates are largely accurate and useful in spite of this heterogeneity. However, the persistent gap between public sentiment and macroeconomic indicators suggests that examining where the common assumptions diverge from economic reality may be a worthwhile line of inquiry to pursue, even when a relevant literature on this topic already exists.
@Andrey4Mir@TheStalwart "It’s the algorithmic maximization of engagement, not the content, that drives polarization." This seems like a non sequitur. If engagement maximisation only served thirst traps a puppies, how would this lead to polarisation exactly?