If FSD is going to be a subscription and you will never own our fancy autopilot feature. Why should the user pay for insurance?

The user is paying for a service that they do not control and which workings are completely opaque. How can responsibility ever lie with the user in such a situation?

Most other professions have you take ethics classes, have ethics boards and even ethics legislation. We're severely lacking in this area as a community. It really shows when every year there's a new company building the Maximum Oppression Orb from the book Dont Build the Maximum Oppression Orb. Its like we're dealing with the moral equivalent of a mentally challenged person all the time

While I agree that the claim that world population is under 1 billion is bonkers, I also think he grossly underestimates how frequent and large the fraud is.

Take Venezuela for example, the UN and several NGO's have confirmed a diaspora caused by chavismo of well over 7 million people. This is not recognized by the venezuelan government and is not reflected in any of the stats pages you can find.

That's a 20-30% difference in the real vs reported population of the country.

And yes. They do fake the elections.

You know this but somehow are rationalizing this game changing fact away.

Yes, people can draw and photoshop things. But it takes time, skill, dedication, etc. This time cost is load bearing in the way society needs to deal with the tools it has for the same reason at the extreme that kitchen knives have different regulations than nuclear weapons.

It is also trivially easy for grok to censor this usage for the vast majority of offenders by using the same LLM technology they already have to classify content created by their own tools. Yes, it could get jailbroken but that requires skill, time, dedication, etc; And it can be rapidly patched, greatly mitigating the scale of abuse.

For many users, linux is already easier to use.

Remember when you were taught to extract the "moral of the story" in school? That was the whole point. That form of communication is what makes art valuable and it definitely is what makes some art more valuable than others.

When hundreds or thousands of companies live and die by your platform, you can't just close accounts arbitrarily.

Either that or you get split up for monopoly. Take your pick, but this shit doesn't work

Every manufacturer in the world has a different opinion as to what those letters mean.

I guess that IS the point of standards, but we really should be experimenting more on the fringes.

I expect this to be entirely true in some cases.

If we start from first principles: - Any one individual is not trained or experienced in the vast majority of scientific disciplines, regardless of his/her expertise in any one field - Even if half the studies published have flaws (where did you get that stat? was that study flawed?), their body of references is filtered by decades of replication and paper ranking of importance - The people doing the studies have decades of study in the particular field they're publishing about

Concluding from first principles: Its more likely that a random individual's opinion about a random niche of scientific study will be wrong than that of an individual trained on that niche

And then also starting from "received wisdom": Joe Schmuck on the street doesn't know more than scientists about their thing