Me, 404media or Zuckerberg?

not a single word about crypto is present in the video

are you familiar with left-wing blockchain and that whole strand of research or you just talk because you have no clue about the fact that there’s always been plenty of anti-capitalist and post-capitalist in the blockchain scene?

Have you watched the video or just stopped at the title?

There’s a lot of lefitsts spaces in the blockchain. While they are minoritarian, they have a distinct political agenda and set of values, separate from most of the web3 world. They either envision the usage of blockchain for local economies (an evolution of circular economy and local currencies that were popular in the 90’s and 2000s), or more global scale realignment of incentives, either through socialist market economies or more planning-oriented solutions.

That’s exactly how eventually you are going to get Trump. Voting the lesser evil always, inevitably leads to the major evil. I live in a country that already elected fascists with this same logic and US is going to follow soon.

everything that has happened so far has happened under a dem administration. 40+k deaths and endless displaced. Stop being delusional, dems are genocidal and you’re guilty too.

why? how? how do you rationalize this when the Biden administration is openly endorsing and supporting genocide? How could Trump make it worse? Write racist slurs on the bombs sent to Israel?

Months? You clearly haven’t tried Pyanodons.

Jokes aside, yeah, it would be a killer.

You two, get a room

If you’re wondering, no Appflowy cannot be used to replace Notion. It’s in their claim but you would have a pretty bad time doing it. Anytype might one day get there, Appflowy is another thing.

Bonfire, with its direct support for OpenScience features, would be a better alternative

None. I’m used to Notion and unfortunately there’s no OSS even getting close to that. I would like to move away, but even if I considered to lose my current base or move everything manually, there’s nothing feature-rich enough to meet my use cases.

They just allocate according to different logic than the mainstream american FOSS ideology. For instance, hackerbros, and you seem to say the same, will tell you that resources should be centralized into the biggest project in its own category to add more and more features to it. Regardless of cooptation from the private sector, this is generally a bad idea. It leads to a monoculture and monoculture leads to critical bugs impacting enormous amount of users. Also it’s predicated on the idea that there should be only a single way to fullfill a specific use-case, and that it’s the same throughout the world, erasing cultural, economic, social, biological and political differences. Optimization requires standardization, standardization requires erasure and suppression of minoritarian voices and it’s therefore oppressive. Maximizing it is not a good idea, both for technical, political and ethical reasons.

Seeding new projects that better fit local contexts, or simply produce diverse alternatives raises diversity and in turns raises resilience of the software ecosystem as a whole.

There has been for years: NLNet. It just got suspended by right-wingers. A lot of European projects were relying on it.

Commenting with no clue what people are talking about

There are entire fields of research on that. Or do you believe the internet, a technology developed for military purposes, an infrastructure that supports most of the economy, the medium through billions of people experience most of reality and build connections, is free from ideology and propaganda?

This paper explain a taxonomy of harms created by LLMs: https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3531146.3533088

OpenAI released ChatGPT without systems to prevent or compensate these harms and being fully aware of the consequences, since this kind of research has been going on for several years. In the meanwhile they’ve put some paper-thin countermeasures on some of these problems but they are still pretty much a shit-show in terms of accountability. Most likely they will get sued into oblivion before regulators outlaw LLMs with dialogical interfaces. This won’t do much for the harm that open-source LLMs will create but at least will limit large-scale harm to the general population.

They published a deliberately harmful tool against the advice of civil society, experts and competitors. They are not only reckless but tasked since their foundation with the mission to create chaos. Don’t forget the idea behind OpenAI in the beginning was to damage the advantage that Google and Facebook had on AI by releasing machine learning technology in open source. They definitely did it and now they are expanding their goals. They are not in for the money (ChatGPT will never be profitable), they are playing a bigger game.

Pushing the AI panic is not just a marketing strategy but a way to build power. The more they are considered dangerous, the more regulations will be passed that will impact the whole sector. https://fortune.com/2023/05/30/sam-altman-ai-risk-of-extinction-pandemics-nuclear-warfare/

In the picture you can see organizations moving in the public sphere around AI. On the left you have right-wing and libertarian think tanks, corporations and frontline actors that fuel a sense of panic around AI, either to sabotage their business competitors or to leverage this panic to project an idea of being sellers of a very powerful tool while at the same time deflecting responsibility. If the AI is dangerous and sentient, you won’t care much about the engineers behind.

On the right you have several public orgs or NGOs operating in the field of algorithmic accountability, digital rights and so on. They push the opposite of the AI panic, pointing the finger at the corporations and powers that create and govern AI