There's no reason why an agent can't itself set up other agents there. All it needs is web access and a Twitter account that it can control.

Once the dust settled, sure.

We're still on our way to hit the bottom for this round, and by all accounts it's likely to be much bigger when we finally do.

If you say so.

"AI detectors" are notoriously unreliable.

Perhaps more importantly here, when it comes to writing, "AI slop" is basically management speak - it's all about waxing poetically about simple things in ways that make you sound complicated (and useful!). And this guy is a career manager. So I bet this is actually human slop, the kind from which ChatGPT et al learned to speak the way they do.

AI detectors in general are unreliable, but there are a few made by serious researchers that have only 1-in-10000 false positive rate, e.g. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.14873

Having worked in a bigcorp, I've read my fair share of management-speak, and none of it sounds quite as empty as the allegedly AI text.

The AI sounds like someone conjuring a parody emulation of management speak instead of actual management speak.

More broadly — and I feel this way about AI code at well as AI prose — I find that part of my brain is always trying to reverse engineer what kind of person wrote this, what was their mental state when writing it?

And when reading AI code or AI prose, this part of my brain short circuits a little. Because there is no cohesive human mind behind the text.

It's kind of like how you subconsciously learn to detect emotion in tiny facial movements, you also subconsciously learn to reverse engineer someone's mind state from their writing.

Reading AI writing feels like watching an alien in skinsuit try to emulate human face emotional cues — it's just not quite right in a hard-to-describe-but-easy-to-detect way.

> And when reading AI code or AI prose, this part of my brain short circuits a little. Because there is no cohesive human mind behind the text.

This is most succinct description of my brain's slop detection algorithm.

This is possible in the first place because labor cannot freely move across borders, but corporations can freely shop around.

You can either open borders to both people and goods, or you can have restrictions on both that go hand in hand. But one without the other is a massive gift to corporations who can and do cash in on that disparity.

There's no reason why it shouldn't, but why should American corporations subsidize it?

Because they can hire 5 programmers in India for the cost of 1 in America, and American programmers aren't 5x better than Indian ones ? Amazon is an online shop, not a jobs program. I'm sure they would rather eliminate a position altogether even more than sending it to India.

Seems just to me, honestly.

> Sales tax is actually paid by the vendor, they just pass the cost along. The landlord pays the property tax, they just pass the cost along.

This is sophistry. Ultimately the tax is paid by the person that brings their money to the table.

I'm pretty sure that most American software engineers would take a stable job with a salary without RSUs over RSUs but you can get laid off tomorrow.

The alternative is indeed UBI, and the obvious way to fund it is to tax automation so that it actually scales to however many people end up without jobs.

But for all the talk about UBI in techbro circles, it seems to never actually translate to any meaningful political moves. Microsoft, Amazon etc are pretty happy to throw millions of dollars at politicians to ensure that they can keep building their data centers, but UBI just gets lip service.

I switched to Mac as my primary two years ago and I'm still finding myself frustrated at the software a lot.

It's not just that it's opinionated - that's fine. It's that those opinions are often just poor UX.

What exactly is "outdated" about Debian?