@Teri_Kanefield I appreciated your thoughts and your expert opinion. As happy about the verdict as I might be, I conceed that your thoughts on appeal have a lot of merit. I am sorry others have treated you this way.
I hate AI impersonation, but someone really needs to do a version of this with Carl Sagan saying all the nice stuff, but Richard Feynman acting as his anger translator.
@kepano "Hey slack, write a response to my coworker, from the perspective of my boss who know sensitive information about DMs between my coworker and a third coworker"
@mttaggart I am trying to make an analogy back to what it was like going to the library in the 80s and 90s... What google is describing is like walking to the library, but then taking a left turn at the door and instead asking a dude huffing paint all your questions, while you are just being bombarded by people trying to hand you pamphlets and trying to cold call, hard sell you stuff from every direction. Oh and the Library is in Times Square
All this LLM crap, especially the latest from Google, has me really bummed out. I did not sign up for a life of avoiding lies from the literal lying machine being shoved down my throat.
But now, I am apparently forced to fight a war against these things, in defense of whatever is left of fact.
@mttaggart Its made me kind of wonder how much people are just confabulating, and can't recognize when other people/LLMs are confabulating. Then I wonder, omg am I doing that? It's a bit of a head trip.
@jsrailton this ranks up there with Lewis Black's "if it wasn't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college" and Babbage's "On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.” in terms watching someone's brain explode. Except, that person is now me.
The team responsible for the FaceTime app on tvOS needs a VERY stern talking-to. Just for starters, take a look at the menu that appears when trying to start a call with a person.
Now imagine if it actually showed the emails or phone numbers for any of these choices. But no, you just have to guess! It’s on a giant TV screen! There’s plenty of room! It is MADDENING!
@Teri_Kanefield I have a specific, hopefully not crazy question.
In addition to people being on the edge, is any of this related to say, America being a common-law system but lay people expecting it to operate in a civil-law matter?
Even when sufficiently calmed down, I still have a nagging “the courts don’t seem to be engaging in the reality of the situation here” feeling. That could just be a lot of care in respecting previous precedent and in establishing new precedent?
@Teri_Kanefield I know I've been dense over a few issues, but I wanted you to know I agree very much with this.
My dad (a local ADA) taught me "appearance of impropriety IS impropriety" so in this case, it's better to take the lumps than to do something that calls your ethics into question.
Going to rejoin Apple, work my way into the Photos team for iOS, add a top level button to rotate a photo, then quit the next day knowing I have improved the lives of billions.
@jamesthomson and Alan Dye will hide it in complex (ax+ib) screen coordinates and then brag about how users can discover the feature by gimbal locking the accelerometer.
@Teri_Kanefield thank you. I had a question, if you are willing to entertain it. I write this as dispassionately as I can trying to remember your posts on the subject.
Zooming out from law to justice, politics, civics and the general question of “what does it mean to serve to public trust?”, I think Trump has demonstrated himself manifestly unqualified.
Do you think electoral defeat is the only legitimate way to enforce this, or just the only one without shaky basis in law? (Continued…)
@Teri_Kanefield (…continued) I ask because I don’t view political power as something a person is owed, nor the inability to attain it to be any sort of injury.
I am having intellectual difficulty figuring out why a bunch of smart people can’t seem to come up with the common sense conclusion that “duh, someone who tries to steal an election and send his crowd against congress is done politically.”
As much as I don’t understand law… I feel like people are missing what law should protect/serve.
@Teri_Kanefield I mean, as a former federal employee I get the zeal to honor the oath and defend from enemies foreign and domestic, but I feel like once people can cast their vote, should he win, it would be really bad vis a vis whole “peaceful transfer of power” thing.
It seems preferable to nerf him while they can still vote for someone else I’ll vote against?
@Teri_Kanefield This opinion reads like the judicial equivalent of "... as IF!" (albiet, very thorough). It also seems like its set up so that any supreme court decision striking it down would have to rely on and apply absurdities. Am I on the right track as a lay person?