> What percentage of the worlds GDP is founded in open source technology?
Everything built on the Internet, to begin with.
> I mean we use emacs/vim
Because they work.
> pretend that virtualization can count as security
No one thing can 'count as security' but virtualization makes a lot of secure systems easier to build.
> and seem utterly choked in our own miasma of complexity.
You are, maybe.
> Integrating old ideas with new is not a matter of mixing software like a chemical mixture but a dick sizing competition without a ruler.
This sounds profound but means nothing.
> We are mechanics who barely understand our own tools and more than that are philosophically against questioning the separation between programming language/user.
This is wrong. On every level, it is wrong. It is fractally wrong. Worse, parts of it aren't even wrong.
> The solution is of course deeply unsettling but luckily novelized throughout our televisors in the form of AI systems that are doing there best to hide their HAL face.
What? Are you saying nothing again, or are you implying you believe that Strong AI exists and is running the world?
> What happens when our mentors start making suggestions? Do you think that same data could be used to find the most efficient manner to shift your opinion? How deeply does the ranking of links affect your judgement about a subject? Are these new questions to you, or have you simply been holding your hands over your ears?
None of these ideas are new. You're saying absolutely nothing that hasn't been said thousands of times before, and you're saying it much, much worse.
> that there are incredibly important and influential decisions being made not by individuals or beliefs, but by circumstance and yet they remain unquestioned despite their significant social and economic impact.
Well, no shit. Why did humans end up in the Americas? Was it by planning or was it just following the game and winding up going across the Bering Land Bridge?
> It is only through the somehow supply/demand immunized Moore's law will humanity be given its mirror, and that truly is an act of a fearful god if there ever was one.
Waffle waffle whine. You have a platform. By all means, use it to say something.
> > What happens when our mentors start making suggestions? Do you think that same data could be used to find the most efficient manner to shift your opinion? How deeply does the ranking of links affect your judgement about a subject? Are these new questions to you, or have you simply been holding your hands over your ears?
> None of these ideas are new. You're saying absolutely nothing that hasn't been said thousands of times before, and you're saying it much, much worse.
Maybe not new, but I think this may be the first time I've thought that anything other than a godlike AI may have enough foreknowledge to usefully manipulate our view of reality through carefully curated content presentation.
I think we're really just a bit of research and applied knowledge away from the beginning of this, if we haven't already arrived.
Everything built on the Internet, to begin with.
> I mean we use emacs/vim
Because they work.
> pretend that virtualization can count as security
No one thing can 'count as security' but virtualization makes a lot of secure systems easier to build.
> and seem utterly choked in our own miasma of complexity.
You are, maybe.
> Integrating old ideas with new is not a matter of mixing software like a chemical mixture but a dick sizing competition without a ruler.
This sounds profound but means nothing.
> We are mechanics who barely understand our own tools and more than that are philosophically against questioning the separation between programming language/user.
This is wrong. On every level, it is wrong. It is fractally wrong. Worse, parts of it aren't even wrong.
> The solution is of course deeply unsettling but luckily novelized throughout our televisors in the form of AI systems that are doing there best to hide their HAL face.
What? Are you saying nothing again, or are you implying you believe that Strong AI exists and is running the world?
> What happens when our mentors start making suggestions? Do you think that same data could be used to find the most efficient manner to shift your opinion? How deeply does the ranking of links affect your judgement about a subject? Are these new questions to you, or have you simply been holding your hands over your ears?
None of these ideas are new. You're saying absolutely nothing that hasn't been said thousands of times before, and you're saying it much, much worse.
> that there are incredibly important and influential decisions being made not by individuals or beliefs, but by circumstance and yet they remain unquestioned despite their significant social and economic impact.
Well, no shit. Why did humans end up in the Americas? Was it by planning or was it just following the game and winding up going across the Bering Land Bridge?
> It is only through the somehow supply/demand immunized Moore's law will humanity be given its mirror, and that truly is an act of a fearful god if there ever was one.
Waffle waffle whine. You have a platform. By all means, use it to say something.