You don't even have to look per se. The YouTube aglo provides me a lot of interesting content that isn't especially high quality or production value. I do take an effort to ignore click bait as much as possible and click "don't recommend channel" for things like MKBHD and LTT, because those crowd out original content if you let them.
Have you not seen how they're already starting to redefine various very benign but anti-government groups as "terrorists"? Next thing you know, just being a part of that group becomes 'objective, verifiable information" that makes them "believe" that you "may commit" some crime?
And pretty much anything, with a semblance of plausibility or causal inference can be used as "objective, verifiable information". They just need to define that property as a) verifiable, b)objective and c) somehow implies some bad other property or future event.
There's a reason that programming is hard, and even harder when you have to use normal non-programming-language constructs.
It's only marginally different. I can look out of the window right now and see objectively verifiable information that has lead some people to believe the earth is flat.
What a belief is based on means squat, it is how that belief came to be that is important.
Anti war activists have been called "terrorist supporters" since at least 2001. Before the 90s were Communist supporters (same thing).
I think people give too much credit to governments. "Of course they'll only use for-sure for-sure objectively terrorist intent verifiable information." No, historically what they'll do is throw you on the list because you followed a hot commie girl to a meetup in college, or attended a protest, or hell bought a watch terrorists happen to use to set timers in bombs.
No it isn't. This "objective, verifiable information" is an open door to using misinformation to frame innocent people of crimes they have not committed.
This type of information is already being used to prevent crimes. People get arrested for planning robberies or murders all the time. Those investigations start based on beliefs that are based on 'objective, verifiable information'. After that intent has to be proven in court with evidence that has been found during an investigation.
In many cases it also leads to a case being dismissed because no evidence is found.
I'm honestly pretty surprised that people think this is a new concept.
There is no mention of probable cause and oversight by a judge. The way this is phrased doesn't even meet the standards for normal police investigations. It's basically a carte blanche for surveillance and secret suspect lists on which nearly anyone can be put.
> In many cases it also leads to a case being dismissed because no evidence is found.
Good luck piecing back together your life at that point, after years of being unemployable and unable to find rental accomodation (and the house that you bought with your life savings is gone, the bank sold it while you were fighting for your freedom).
> Or there were some way to prove I am human without saying _which_ human I am.
I'm sure at some point a sort of trust network type thing will take off. Will be hard to find a way to make it both private and secure, but I guess some smart people will figure that out!
You and I seem to live in very different worlds. The one I live and work in is full of over confident devs that have no actual IT education and mostly just copy and modify what they find on the internet. The average level of IT people I see daily is down right shocking and I'm quite confident that OP's workflow might be better for these people in the long run.
It's going to be very funny in the next few years when Accenture et al charge the government billions for a simple Java crud website thing that's entirely GPT-generated, and it'll still take 3 years and not be functional. Ironically, it'll be of better quality then they'd deliver otherwise.
> The one I live and work in is full of over confident devs that have no actual IT education and mostly just copy and modify what they find on the internet.
Too many get into the field solely due to promises of large paychecks, not due to the intellectual curiosity that drives real devs.
With a friend, I created a website about a race track in the past two years. I definitely used AI to speed up some of writing. One thing I used it for was a track guide, describing every corner and how to drive it. It was surprisingly accurate, most of the time. The other times though, it would drive the track backwards, completely hallucinate the instructions or link corners that are in different parts of the track.
I spent a lot of time analyzing the track myself and fixed everything to the point that experienced drivers agreed with my description. If I hadn't done that, most visitors would probably still accept our guide as the truth, because they wouldn't know any better.
We know that not everyone cares about whether what they put on the internet is correct and AI allows those people to create content at an unprecedented pace. I fully agree with your sentiment.
Germany has been closing tons of nuclear power plants because of protests. They've recently also moved an entire town and a highway to make space for digging up more coal.
I'm not really answering your question, but it does seem like nuclear NIMBYs are more effective than other ones.
