Skip to content
0
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Sketchy)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Wandering Adventure Party

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. Because a LOT of people are missing the point:

Because a LOT of people are missing the point:

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
155 Posts 109 Posters 10 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Tom BortelsT Tom Bortels

    @ApostateEnglishman @jackwilliambell @cstross

    Brain implants are and were dumb on their face.

    It turns out we have several excellent brain interfaces available and honed over millions of years of evolution - our eyes, ears, hands, voice, and a bunch of more subtle ones like touch and balance. They are intuitive, built-in, and free. And none of them are permanently invasive, which saves all sorts of biology issues.

    The only real use-case for any sort of implant is where you have no alternative - the pacemaker comes to mind. The rest are someone trying to sell you something you don't need or want.

    HighlandLawyerH This user is from outside of this forum
    HighlandLawyerH This user is from outside of this forum
    HighlandLawyer
    wrote last edited by
    #143

    @ApostateEnglishman @jackwilliambell @cstross @tbortels
    There's also the option of external devices which communicate directly with the brain, no hole in the head required.

    Jack William BellJ 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • jbJ jb

      @woozle Even then, it's not actually economical if the customers aren't willing to pay extra for the resources, which will be highly latent in a world that despises latency.

      You end up with Sealand all over again, where the idea is better than the implementation ever can be.

      Eventually, you have orbiting scrap, cluttering the sky, slowly decaying in orbit.

      @cstross

      Woozle HypertwinW This user is from outside of this forum
      Woozle HypertwinW This user is from outside of this forum
      Woozle Hypertwin
      wrote last edited by
      #144

      @jb

      I could address these points... but it kind of feels like you mainly want to establish the idea that "this is a really bad idea", which I agree is true right now and for the reasonably foreseeable future.

      @cstross

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

        Because a LOT of people are missing the point:

        No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".

        But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.

        Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.

        So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.

        Tom DB 🦣T This user is from outside of this forum
        Tom DB 🦣T This user is from outside of this forum
        Tom DB 🦣
        wrote last edited by
        #145

        @cstross bla bla bla bla bla

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • HighlandLawyerH HighlandLawyer

          @ApostateEnglishman @jackwilliambell @cstross @tbortels
          There's also the option of external devices which communicate directly with the brain, no hole in the head required.

          Jack William BellJ This user is from outside of this forum
          Jack William BellJ This user is from outside of this forum
          Jack William Bell
          wrote last edited by
          #146

          @HighlandLawyer @ApostateEnglishman @cstross @tbortels

          Then the rules still apply. If it can change my brain state? I will have a difficult time trusting it. In truth? I sometimes distrust my own senses.

          Human perceptions are imperfect and brain-mediated. Ever look at anything and simply not see some detail on it until it's pointed out for you? Ever hallucinate? Not smell a stink because you got used to it?

          We get ALL information via lofi, low-trust channels. We cannot trust our lying eyes.

          Jack William BellJ HighlandLawyerH 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • Jack William BellJ Jack William Bell

            @HighlandLawyer @ApostateEnglishman @cstross @tbortels

            Then the rules still apply. If it can change my brain state? I will have a difficult time trusting it. In truth? I sometimes distrust my own senses.

            Human perceptions are imperfect and brain-mediated. Ever look at anything and simply not see some detail on it until it's pointed out for you? Ever hallucinate? Not smell a stink because you got used to it?

            We get ALL information via lofi, low-trust channels. We cannot trust our lying eyes.

            Jack William BellJ This user is from outside of this forum
            Jack William BellJ This user is from outside of this forum
            Jack William Bell
            wrote last edited by
            #147

            @HighlandLawyer @ApostateEnglishman @cstross @tbortels

            This one fact deeply underscores the importance of the 'Scientific Method' in understanding the universe. Science isn't perfect either, but it has trust-protocols.

            Your senses don't.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • Jack William BellJ Jack William Bell

              @cstross @ApostateEnglishman

              My rules for brain implants:

              1. I will not alpha or beta test; in fact I think waiting for v3.25 is probably for the best

              2. Must run Open Source software *not using any dependencies requiring a Package Manager*

              3. Must not require *any* kind of 'cloud' to operate, must work fine without a network connection, and must be locally configurable

              4. You know what? Even if it meets rules 1 to 3 I'm still not too hot on the idea…

              aspraggA This user is from outside of this forum
              aspraggA This user is from outside of this forum
              aspragg
              wrote last edited by
              #148

              @jackwilliambell @cstross @ApostateEnglishman

              My one brain implant rule: all software must be in #Debian `stable`/`main`. This means:

              a) it, and all dependencies, are DFSG-compatible https://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines

              b) and have 3 years support by the Debian security team https://www.debian.org/security/faq#lifespan

              c) and maybe 5 years https://www.debian.org/lts/

              d) and passed the freeze process with no RC-bugs that would have kept them out of the release https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-faq/ftparchives#frozen

              …and also still not too hot on the idea 🙂

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • Jack William BellJ Jack William Bell

                @cstross @ApostateEnglishman

                NOTE: Those rules used to be much simpler. More along the lines of, "Not anything using Microsoft or Oracle software."

                ETA: Insert joke about, "Blue Screen of Death."

                TubemeisterT This user is from outside of this forum
                TubemeisterT This user is from outside of this forum
                Tubemeister
                wrote last edited by
                #149

                @jackwilliambell @cstross @ApostateEnglishman could be worse.

                Clippy.

                WellsiteGeoW 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

                  Because a LOT of people are missing the point:

                  No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".

                  But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.

                  Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.

                  So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.

                  You're a Buzz Kill, 👀 Patty.P This user is from outside of this forum
                  You're a Buzz Kill, 👀 Patty.P This user is from outside of this forum
                  You're a Buzz Kill, 👀 Patty.
                  wrote last edited by
                  #150

                  @cstross Tesla is tanking. Starlink is becoming the DSL of the wireless internet (greedily oversubscribed bandwidth slowing it ... ....d o w n ...). Musk needs another source of suckers...er...investors... to fuel his rightwing apartheid ego.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

                    Because a LOT of people are missing the point:

                    No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".

                    But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.

                    Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.

                    So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.

                    Mastodon MigrationM This user is from outside of this forum
                    Mastodon MigrationM This user is from outside of this forum
                    Mastodon Migration
                    wrote last edited by
                    #151

                    @cstross

                    Elon has always excelled at selling impossible future stuff to the rubes. When his businesses are evaluated based on performance like Tesla is now, it's disastrous. That's also why he is pivoting to robot cars.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

                      Because a LOT of people are missing the point:

                      No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".

                      But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.

                      Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.

                      So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.

                      CC_FL_IT_GUYD This user is from outside of this forum
                      CC_FL_IT_GUYD This user is from outside of this forum
                      CC_FL_IT_GUY
                      wrote last edited by
                      #152

                      @cstross
                      Elon apparently loves breaking laws.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • Jack William BellJ Jack William Bell

                        @HighlandLawyer @ApostateEnglishman @cstross @tbortels

                        Then the rules still apply. If it can change my brain state? I will have a difficult time trusting it. In truth? I sometimes distrust my own senses.

                        Human perceptions are imperfect and brain-mediated. Ever look at anything and simply not see some detail on it until it's pointed out for you? Ever hallucinate? Not smell a stink because you got used to it?

                        We get ALL information via lofi, low-trust channels. We cannot trust our lying eyes.

                        HighlandLawyerH This user is from outside of this forum
                        HighlandLawyerH This user is from outside of this forum
                        HighlandLawyer
                        wrote last edited by
                        #153

                        @ApostateEnglishman @cstross @tbortels @jackwilliambell
                        Decarte's demon

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • Jack William BellJ Jack William Bell

                          @cstross @ApostateEnglishman

                          My rules for brain implants:

                          1. I will not alpha or beta test; in fact I think waiting for v3.25 is probably for the best

                          2. Must run Open Source software *not using any dependencies requiring a Package Manager*

                          3. Must not require *any* kind of 'cloud' to operate, must work fine without a network connection, and must be locally configurable

                          4. You know what? Even if it meets rules 1 to 3 I'm still not too hot on the idea…

                          LisPiL This user is from outside of this forum
                          LisPiL This user is from outside of this forum
                          LisPi
                          wrote last edited by
                          #154

                          Jack William Bell Charlie Stross The Sleight Doctor 🃏

                          not using any dependencies requiring a Package Manager

                          Nothing like using obsolete vendored libraries.

                          Somewhat joke aside, language-centric dependency/“package” managers are an antipattern that should never have been adopted.

                          Dependency/build managers (i.e. tools that know how to build a given language provided the dependencies are available on the system, obtaining them being out of scope of its duties) are fine (insofar as dead languages are, anyway).

                          And I’m NOT having one of those brain implants, no way!)

                          It’s proprietary malware, it’s a good idea to reject it.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • TubemeisterT Tubemeister

                            @jackwilliambell @cstross @ApostateEnglishman could be worse.

                            Clippy.

                            WellsiteGeoW This user is from outside of this forum
                            WellsiteGeoW This user is from outside of this forum
                            WellsiteGeo
                            wrote last edited by
                            #155

                            @Tubemeister @jackwilliambell @cstross @ApostateEnglishman
                            One thing we've learned from AI is that Clippy was not the worst thing humans could invent.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • Jürgen HubertJ Jürgen Hubert shared this topic

                            Reply
                            • Reply as topic
                            Log in to reply
                            • Oldest to Newest
                            • Newest to Oldest
                            • Most Votes


                            • Login

                            • Login or register to search.
                            Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                            • First post
                              Last post