arj

@max_spero_ It's more expensive.

Can anyone explain to me why we don’t have ethical meat? Surely we can give the farm animal a significantly better life than it would have lived in the wild.

@0xthestudents @benlandautaylor Drones will bring it back

The musket created democracy, and the machine gun killed it. @benlandautaylor discusses Carroll Quigley's "Weapons Systems And Political Stability"—how military technology shapes the structure of government, and why elections are mostly ceremonial rituals today. 3:37 - What is a weapons system? 5:00 - Politics is downstream of force 19:18 - Offense, defense, and the natural scale of empires 25:26 - Modern weapons require continent-sized economies 38:20 - Whoever can afford the weapons holds the power 42:50 - Democracy does not mean voting 59:17 - Democracy is not an ideological process but a military one 1:13:43 - "There has never been an all-out war between first-rate industrial powers that knew what a computer was"

Open Source ftw.

@ColbyBadhwar @WeaponScientist It’s open source… there’s nothing to offer

🇺🇦🇺🇸 Secretary of the Army Driscoll: "Ukraine's Delta common operating system, their modular open system architecture, C2 system is absolutely incredible. It fully integrates every single drone, sensor, and shooting platform into just one single network. Ours does not." Wow, if only Ukraine was offering the United States some sort of deal that would facilitate the sharing of this technology.

@disclosetv bbc.com/news/articles/… more of this

NOW - King Charles: "My ministers will also proceed with the introduction of Digital ID."

@Hashashin021 @RT_com > China should arrest this fox team for spreading propaganda against their country. The recursive irony in this statement.

@RT_com China should arrest this fox team for spreading propaganda against their country.

Fox News complains: 'literally cameras EVERYWHERE in Beijing' 'Our driver parked illegally for 2 mins and got a $40 ticket'

Everything and I mean every conceivable chart for quality of life peaks or has its final peak at 2007. If only we could figure out what about 2008 ruined life in the west...

@TheRealDanSaedi Perhaps we should make the red dot efficient.

The singular red dot is causing a massive compute shortage and you think memory stocks have topped?

@Noahpinion this is why it’s not over

Trump lost a war to Iran

@DoTiLaTiDoTi @Polymarket @grok what are the odds of dying from hantavirus if you get it and why is op terrible at statistics...

@Polymarket Odds of dying from hantavirus: 1 in 30-35M Odds of dying from a lightning strike: 1 in 15-20M Odds of dying in a car accident 1 in 8,000-9,000 Odds of dying from medical error: 1 in 1,000-1,400 If someone is telling you to freak out about Hantavirus, they're lying to you.

JUST IN: Illinois investigating potential hantavirus case which officials say is “not linked” to the cruise ship outbreak.

@heinenbros Would rather own a gun than install corporate spyware and wait for the govt.

In situations like the Cambridge shooting, videos are often online before cops. Raven (formerly GeoSpy AI) is capable of taking low-context footage of active threats and locating them down to the exact meter instantly.

@glukianoff @ACABImmunity @Google No. The First Amendment restricts government action, not the consequence for speech. Students have a natural and moral right to speak freely, but free speech does not protect them from enforcement of neutral rules or laws, such as trespassing.

@SigPi_ @ACABImmunity @Google Nonsense. Absolute nonsense. You are supporting “might make right” the absolute opposite of freedom of speech.

.@Google's chief scientist and lead for Gemini AI came to UC Berkeley to give a scientific lecture on modern AI research. He wasn’t there to debate Gaza or Google contracts, but protesters disrupted the event anyway, and within 10 minutes, it was shut down.

@FurkanGozukara Why do you think America was made?

An expert historian drops a massive truth bomb. He confirms the elite intentionally invented corporations and jobs to crush the middle class. The aristocracy forced independent merchants into hourly labor to protect royal monopolies.

Why is it okay for Israel to not register as a foreign agent, lobby states to suppress speech, and use our military for its own purposes? My point is, citizens can’t violate free speech. They can break the law and claim their right to break the law is allowed by the first amendment. That process occurs through the judicial system where the courts decide if the argument is legitimate. The actions of the protestors do not violate the first amendment because they are not the state, feel free to make a judgement on the Israeli approach.

@SigPi_ @glukianoff @Google It's the integrity of the protestors demanding their own free speech. Do they ever consider the speaker's free speech that they are blocking?

No, that’s not my view. There is active suppression of speech by the Israeli lobby influencing the state, that same country has also led us into a to war the majority does not want to participate in. These students are protesting that force by targeting companies who do business with that state. We should note Israel does the same at the state level which preclude entities from contracting with the state if they participate in the boycott, divest, and sanction movement. These are not equivalences, one uses state power to suppress speech which is an actual violation of the first amendment; the other protests the force violating the first amendment.

@SigPi_ @ACABImmunity @glukianoff @Google If what you support is speech *within* the container created by academic institutions then you will care when an academic institution uses its agency (or not) in a way that reduces speech within that container. You may not care about this but there are reasons to.

You’re treating “free speech” as if only the invited speaker has agency. My argument is that disruptive protest can be expressive conduct, belonging to the same natural-right tradition the First Amendment protects. That does not mean every disruptive act is legal, nor that protestors are immune from consequences. The institution can enforce neutral rules through discipline, removal, or police action where appropriate. The constitutional issue is not that the protestors “violated the First Amendment.” They are not the state. The constitutional issue is whether Berkeley, as a public institution, failed to enforce neutral rules in a way that allowed unlawful disruption to become a heckler’s veto.

That’s incorrect. First off, disruption and silencing is not protected speech. There has to be actual speech to protect, and the protection only applies vs the state. 1A also doesn’t protect fraud or libel or “fighting words.” It protects political speech, which includes a middle finger to a police officer. But turning off someone else’s mic is not protected by 1A nor is it “speech” at all under 1A. Protestors don’t have a legal right to shut down (or even enter) a private event without consent of the host. The trespassing and harassment don’t occur when charged…they occur when they occur. Most crimes are never charged. That’s certainly a very minor legal violation (trespassing, harassment). I don’t condemn it ethically. But it’s certainly against the principles of 1A and “free speech” to silence others. And no, the university couldn’t have just removed them to allow free speech again (at least not without major risk) since in so many cases that produced violence and more disruption.

@NathanS76141525 @MalaFide77 @AriDavidPaul @glukianoff @Google I don't disagree, though I would say immediate termination or expulsion may be excessive for non-repeat offenders, but trespassing and free speech are orthogonal.

@SigPi_ @MalaFide77 @AriDavidPaul @glukianoff @Google Disrupting an invited speaker is trespassing and should result in immediate termination of one's employment or expulsion. That's what I think.

@dbreunig > 3rd party harnesses become less valuable when used with frontier lab models business decisions

OpenAI winding down fine tuning is an interesting development and one to watch. On one hand, model maximalists will argue the largest models keep getting better at more things, so the need to adjust the weights of them is less necessary. On the other hand, the big labs keep pushing their models to a handful of use cases while training their harness designs into the model, rendering them less generalized. There's an argument _this is fine_, because coding and reasoning abilities will solve most other problems. But what we end up with are models build for their own harnesses. @badlogicgames was wrestling with Claude in the OSS Pi harness this week, trying to wrangle out specific in-harness behaviors, with Claude fighting him every step of the way. If this continues, there's a world where 3rd party harnesses become less valuable when used with frontier lab models because the 1st party harness behavior is already _baked in_. And there's no longer a fine tuning escape hatch to generalize this behavior away. Will then frontier models resemble appliances, not general platforms? With their harness trained in and no ability to adjust it? This might make application building easier for some enterprises, but the trade off is lock in.

The situation you described can justify the use of force for violating the terms of usage in that space. The university was well within its means to forcibly remove the protestors, it chose not to. If someone were to do as you say, in a space where we are discussing what does a "well-regulated militia" mean in practice, they would be removed.

Suppose you get together some lecture about Gaza and everyone was going learn about Gaza and whatever things you guys talk about at these meetings And then, for some reason, a bunch of nerds get together with bullhorns and show up at your talk about Gaza and start drowning everything out talking about how AI works That would be annoying as fuck and you wouldn’t like it And then they would say oh but we have freedom of speech. We’re going to keep talking about AI works even if you showed up to talk about Gaza You would be happy when they were removed from the building

@naterdogg @AriDavidPaul @glukianoff @Google What do you think the American Revolution was? Rights are not granted by the state.

@SigPi_ @AriDavidPaul @glukianoff @Google "Right to disrupt" 😂