I find ChatGPT's voice to text to be the absolute best in the world, nearly perfect.
I have constant frustrations with Gemini voice to text misunderstanding what I'm saying or worse, immediately sending my voice note when I pause or breathe even though I'm midway through a sentence.
Indeed, working hard towards a goal is never a waste, it can often be a learning experience regardless of the end result. And that learning is extremely valuable and also takes time.
Then you learn, adjust and try to avoid that in the future, ideally helping others from making the same mistake. Everyone makes mistakes, the scope/extent is slightly different for all of us, but everyone should have chance at redeeming themselves even if they did harm. Otherwise we'll run out of compassion very quickly.
> everyone should have chance at redeeming themselves even if they did harm.
You're changing the subject. Nobody is arguing that the author is irredeemable. On the contrary, the author seems to have recognized his own mistake and changed his course, at least to an extent. The question is whether the author's years in crypto were a waste, and I would say that it's indeed a waste to spend 8 years on something just to "learn" that one shouldn't have done that thing.
> Everyone makes mistakes
This is also changing the subject. Everyone does not spend 8 years in crypto.
I've made some big mistakes, and I think I've also wasted a lot of time. The wasted time was not "valuable" by learning that I wasted my time. It was simply regrettable.
On the other hand, I don't think I've ever spent a lot of time and effort on an activity that broadly harms society. I don't need to do that in order to learn that I shouldn't do that. Some things are just blatantly obvious in advance, or should be. You shouldn't need to dedicate your life to crypto to realize it's all a big casino.
It's not about "learning to not do that single thing" but learning from everything you picked up during that period, good or bad. And even if what you did had the net-effect of being negative to society, you can learn from the things you experienced during that time, meaning it wouldn't be a waste, at least in my mind.
> I don't think I've ever spent a lot of time and effort on an activity that broadly harms society
Me neither. I worked in the cryptocurrency industry, sold drugs, interacted with gangs, and a bunch of other stuff but none of them broadly harmed society, so seems we're more or less the same on that point.
But everyone's frame of reference and reality is difference, there is no absolute truth here, trying to paint it as such is actively doing a disservice to any sort of discourse we could have about the subject.
One could surely argue that making "paid browser extensions" somehow have a net negative impact on the world, and if that was proven, would that mean all the time you spent on those sort of projects were suddenly wasteful and you should have realized this up front? Seems inhumane if so.
> you can learn from the things you experienced during that time
Of course you can learn from your experience, and the author did learn from his experience, which is the entire point of the tweet, so the author doesn't need to be told that he can learn from his experience. He already knows!
Nonetheless, the author considers his time to have been a waste.
> meaning it wouldn't be a waste
This does not follow.
> I worked in the cryptocurrency industry, sold drugs, interacted with gangs, and a bunch of other stuff but none of them broadly harmed society
Ok...
> One could surely argue that making "paid browser extensions" somehow have a net negative impact on the world, and if that was proven, would that mean all the time you spent on those sort of projects were suddenly wasteful and you should have realized this up front?
If that was proven? Well, prove it. Go ahead, make my day. Otherwise, this is just a silly piece of sophistry with no applicability.
I guess that would depend on your own personal moral backbone as to which direction you would go at that point. Undoubtedly you’ll learn something either way, but hopefully someone would adjust for their next effort.
Probably by choosing a more realistic goal. Who even thinks they can build a "new financial system?" When governments already control, by law, the current one?
By building a system that facilitates the economy rather than being inherently based around fraud and gambling. Crypto is not the only way to build a futuristic financial system.
After reading the article, this is actually a great thing for Americans?
Previously, if you didn't have your "Real ID" (which, is a terrible name IMO) or passport, you were just... denied. And presumably that would cost far more than $45.
This seems like an extra step to help you get through airports and prevent delays.
Also, $45 for 30 minutes of a TSA agent's time + their software seems very reasonable? That could even be operating at a loss.
I get it, the median person flies 0 times a year, the average person flies 1.5-2 times a year, there's a huge number of people who fly 0-2 times a year. Mistakes happen and they should result in seizing the whole system.
...but it's just insane to me that someone could go to an airport and not have an ID, let alone a passport. Come on.
Edit (didn't realize the article continued):
> American travelers were still permitted to fly without this updated form of ID with no penalties; they simply had to undergo additional screening, including handing over current addresses, per the TSA's website.
You have always been able to fly without ID by submitting to enhanced physical screening. John Gilmore sued the TSA over the ID requirement but lost, *edited I reread the opinion and the court found there was no 4th amendment violations, but enhanced screening was an option available to him even back in 2004 that he declined.
TSA is not required to allow people without ID to fly but they do and because suddenly a lot of people do not have acceptable ID, and not because of circumstances beyond their control, TSA is instituting the fees.
Your claim is contradicted by several first-hand accounts on this page, as well as by the current documentation on the TSA website:
> Passengers who present a state-issued identification that is not REAL ID compliant at TSA checkpoints and who do not have another acceptable alternative form of ID will be notified of their non-compliance, may be directed to a separate area and may receive additional screening. This includes TSA PreCheck passengers.
> Don’t Have Your Acceptable ID?
> The TSA officer may ask you to complete an identity verification process which includes collecting information such as your name and current address to confirm your identity. If your identity is confirmed, you will be allowed to enter the screening checkpoint, where you may be subject to additional screening.
> You will not be allowed to enter the security checkpoint if you choose to not provide acceptable identification, you decline to cooperate with the identity verification process, or your identity cannot be confirmed.
You make a great point, but (as noted in the article) some of us feel that the TSA is a joke for various reasons; one of which may be that the TSA did not actually accept forms of ID which their website states are acceptable :)
This seems like an old article, but probably still true today
What I don't get is, why wouldn't Elon just make a good version of Grokipedia. It seems way easier than continually telling his 200MM+ followers how great a deeply broken product is.
this laughable article cites luminaries such as unnamed "experts" and a computer science grad student. So, no, this is not enough - can you yourself define what you mean by "ultra-right" viewpoints ?
I suspect that you might've tried to use an LLM to summarize the article, which is why you missed critical data and got some of the basic facts about its sourcing incorrect. I'm a fan of using LLM's to speed up research, but you should probably pick a different model next time.
the article remains laughable because it is biased agitprop quoting a single unpublished pre-print paper with no attempt to provide any counter arguments in favour of the site. Have you actually visited ? I took a look at the articles on white nationalism and National Socialism and found them quite informative. Nothing "hateful" that I could see.
Now visit the Wikipedia articles on "Drug Liberalization", Communism, Roe v Wade, abortion to see the left wing bias in favour of drug legalization, white-washing Stalin's crimes, against reversal of Roe v Wade, and in favour of abortion.
Could it be, could it possibly be, because he’s not an honest broker but a deeply wounded, emotionally immature malignant narcissist who needs the world to conform to his darkest viewpoints so that he can tell himself that he is not the imperfect person he knows himself to be?
Start putting real facts into a site and before you know it you're "woke" again with such untruths as Slavery was Bad, Biden won the 2020 Election and of course Full Self Driving is Impossible without Lidar
Seriously. My Christmas wish is for everyone to understand that Grokipedia was not created in good faith, by someone who wants free and open knowledge to flourish.
>Start putting real facts into a site and before you know it you're "woke" again
This is precisely the problem that is being arrogantly failing to be addressed by grokipedia. This idea that knowledge naturally leans ideologically left and that as such it's not only natural, but even beneficial that there is widespread left wing bias.
"Joe Biden won the 2020 election" is not a "left wing" notion (or if you're looking for a more hefty one, "vaccines do not cause autism"). it is objective fact. the "left wing" has nothing to do with this, it's about the "right wing" has decided to reject objective fact as part of their ideological platform.
It's really location dependent. The one near me missed opening time by more than 30 minutes one day last week. I don't have more data because I only would splurge for a fast food breakfast when I need it.
Highway expansion is already here in many areas! Waymo has been laying the groundwork for this rapid rollout for so many years and it's amazing to see it all come together.
Waymo's usually something like 50% more expensive than Lyft in SF, in my experience. But the drivers don't tailgate, have colds, listen to your conversation (AFAIK)...I'll generally opt for Waymo now if I have a choice. The biggest problem I have is that it's usually a longer wait due to the smaller fleet size, but if I'm planning ahead, I'll just book one for a given time, and that takes care of it.
Lyft from MV to SF is like $100 I think? It's definitely not enjoyable but for Bay Area prices it's not ruinously expensive.
You /should/ be able to save by using shared rides, but in practice when I tried the driver was so mad they just dumped me on the side of the road and I had to call and get a refund.
The new Caltrain schedule isn't half bad though, if it came twice as often on the weekends we'd be cooking.
You don't need a lot of space to see everything, because you can store information in your memory.
You narrow down your options by having knowledge like "I have points on these airlines so I want to fly on Star Alliance which has partners that fly out of (quick check) these airports, so let's plan the itinerary in this way..."
I just got back from traveling the last 3 months (40 flights, 6 continents) and planned all of it from my phone. From flights, to hotels, to visas.
And it's simply better than a laptop. 4 tabs in 4 browsers means you're distracted, you're not pruning useless information, you don't know what you don't know.
I do 95% of my work on my phone too, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
I have constant frustrations with Gemini voice to text misunderstanding what I'm saying or worse, immediately sending my voice note when I pause or breathe even though I'm midway through a sentence.
reply