No transparency, though. Cannot be sure.

Another technique is to use past trauma events such a divorce or childhood abuse as part of customized content on one’s feed.

Without transparency, how could one know if this was being done intentionally or not? Big tech valuations are largely tied to information asymmetry and secrecy as such. What power could they enjoy over a user if the user was able to see all of the data they hoard and how it’s being used in full transparent detail?

Now: Homeless and broke. Out of work for a long time. I let people shit all over me, even in adulthood.

I was told that adulthood would be different. In fact, it was the same as childhood, but more insidious.

I pray for death being unable to commit suicide. Failed attempts. I don’t want any help. I just want to go to sleep and not wake up.

Related: is it weird that the identity of my childhood bully ostensibly exists on some dossier in possession by a big tech company, and has been used as part of a demoralization campaign? How would I even know if this had occurred intentionally? Seems to me that the information secrecy and closed source nature of social media big tech firms is ripe for abusing data as part of malicious psychological warfare: bullying on algorithmic steroids. I am quite sure that this has happened to me repeatedly (google, twitter), yet there’s no pathway to inquire, etc. no accountability, no transparency. Unlike other hn users, I don’t have insider friends at those orgs to inquire.

After many life disasters in part related to urban living with these conditions, I have found myself long term homeless and destitute. I tried moving back into a city a few years ago, in a “luxury” building that had poor construction standards, particularly in terms of the sound isolation from neighbors and outside.

If I could go back, I’d place sound isolation at the top of the list of requirements, given my disability. Might have helped to restart software development. Bummer.

Great article.

The overarching concern is that Musk’s national security portfolio is too broad, which presents a unique risk without precedent.