62% home ownership in 1960’s for much smaller homes (on average 700 sqft) vs 65% now for an average of 2000sqft

62% -> 65% sounds reasonable.

700 sqft on average -> 2000 sqft on average is suspicious though. It’s possible stats got skewed by the top 1%, who are today richer than ever before, and own ridiculous amount of property. Median sqft perhaps would be more representative

I have a very hard time reframing things

Because you are not supposed to. Emotions exist one layer of abstraction lower than consciousness, hence frontal lobe can’t override them manually. It’s evolutionary safety measure

If you have arachnophobia, just think of it as the spider-man, this will surely do the trick /s

Why not spend 5 minutes and find a place that has exact same meals, but doesn’t use AI?

I would take Word (or LibreOffice Writer) bullet point list with prices and ingredients list over “pretty” AI menu at this point

Your point can still get across

Probably even sharper than with AI, because it looks cleaner and has less distracting elements

I might not be able to tell every time something is AI. That’s true.

But if a person has put zero effort making sure it doesn’t look like AI, then I have every right to call that out.

If you cheat, at least be smart about it and not get caught.

Surely this will make them finally realize it is unsustainable to demand consumer to upgrade their hardware every few years?.. Right? Right??

That’s weird. If they want an OS to tinker with, Windows is the worst option really. Why not Arch or Gentoo or NixOS?

This article’s title is ridiculous. What do you mean ‘why don’t normal people use agentic AI?’ Were they supposed to?

deleted by creator

I think there were already some research findings, how software developers tend to drastically overestimate how much AI helped them, while AI was actually hindering their productivity. It could be the same case here.

What AI is really good at is spitting out plausible sounding garbage, pretending it did some comprehensive research on the topic, and making people feel like it’s helpful without neccessarily being so.

Shill harder, we need to deliver more shareholder value

Signal is better, but if the concern is Telegram scanning messages and automatically sending them to the police, that doesn’t seem to happen either. Durov doesn’t care, for better or worse, like Telegram being used for drugs and terrorism. Although Telegram employees themselves could be snooping through your messages, that’s true

She may have overestimated the degree of privacy her DMs had. That’s also on her.

Her fault for being too busy teaching kids and surviving on $40k salary instead of researching perfect OPSEC and going down the digital privacy rabbit hole

Mass surveillance has been around for like, what, 20 years now? How well has it worked out with preventing school shootings?

Passive indiscriminate mass surveillance doesn’t do shit to prevent or stop crime.

Becoming a billionaire really does seem to get to people’s heads, the younger the billionaire the worse.

Zuck is being completely reckless, burning through hundreds of billions of dollars hopping on every futuristic idea, and doesn’t listen to anyone’s fair criticism anymore.

He probably even thinks he is some great visionary and everyone else is holding him back, and that’s why they work for him, not the opposite.

In a sane socioeconomic system we wouldn’t people get this rich and powerful for their own good, especially young people.

Yep. In this case: rules are written in blood, yet some people forget why they are here in the first place.

Only to inevitably find out “holy shit, now i get it”

Wikimedia please fire whatever consulting firm told you it’s a good idea to do extractive capitalism as a non-profit foundation, reliant on long-term community goodwill and sustainable work ethics with low turnover rate

Digital literacy doesn’t do much when it comes to tech engineered to hook you and grab your attention. It bypasses the frontal lobe entirely.

At this point I don’t even know anyone who managed to use something like Instagram “occasionally” or in controlled manner. It’s way too addictive for this, and usage spirals out of control pretty fast.

I do agree with you generally though, schools should only use evidence-based interventions or none at all, no exceptions. In healthcare rolling out a drug without randomized control trial would be called heresy.

But when government does it, it makes it mandatory for all kids immediately, and then ignores increasing pile of evidence how it’s bad for decades