Now stupidity—that's something that really sets us apart from animals.

Anyway, it's not a valid comparison when we're actively refusing to get involved in the conflict in any way that would risk our imperial interests.

Assuming you're actually referring to free software and not open source software, it really doesn't, though. It's straight up better in every way than service-oriented software and commercial software in every way... except actually compensating developers. I'd work for a pittance writing free software if there were any institutional support for it. But who wants to kill the golden goose, even if it means our lives would all be greatly improved?

That's not "complicated", this is the opportunity to make a shit ton of money by charging people for software despite insignificant marginal costs. Even if it means humanity writes the same goddamn software over and over and over and over and over and over and over again, mostly shittier than the last iteration.

You're not wrong, but advertisers are a cancer on society that not only do not contribute any value but actively destroy the world around us. it's difficult to assign anything but deeply negative value to their needs and concerns.

(I'm aware we don't have an understanding of how quantum physics interacts with singularities, but the whole billiard ball metaphor certainly is incoherent with it)

Is this really still relevant? I've been using only python3 for well over a decade now and I can't remember the last time anyone even suggested I use python2. the rest of your critiques ring true though.

It's been more than a decade since google results were distinguishable from bing results. Both spam you with commercial crap.

> This may be so, but there is no competition that's even 10% better than Google.

Kagi is much better than google. I have no clue what their baseline search quality is like, but I don't care because I can customize it enough to far outstrip quality that google can provide as google refuses to provide (or has actively disabled) the tools necessary to make search useful, like allowing the user to blacklist domains against all their searches or prioritize certain domains. Which is dumb, because how could they know what sort of results i value if they refuse to ask?

What we really need is an engine that excludes all commercial results, and an option to exclude sites with ads. That'd be a goldmine.

Unfortunately, they're also notoriously unreliable as a dumb pipe.

Is there any indication that all reality is not just "quantum bookkeeping" (at a quantum and not gravitational scale, which is also consistent and coherent)? It seems like splitting hairs to differentiate outside of referring to literal discourse, ie referring to the signifier rather than the signified. Otherwise we would not be able to consistently and precisely measure the quantifiable (un)certainty that forms our models.

Of course all our models could be wildly inaccurate and I look like a fool. But that's just looping back to the concept that it's simpler to assume that the world is consistent than to assume the world is conspiring to deceive you.

Utilitarianism is a moral concept. I think you just mean analytical.