The parent was saying HFT firms would do this to other HFT firms. They would care about doing this kind of thing - it’s not a white collar crime. And foreign adversaries would care about doing this during peacetime, especially for very unclear benefit.
Sure but quite a few claims in the article are about AI research. He does not have any qualifications there. If the focus was more on usefulness, that would be a different discussion and then his experience does add weight.
> woah buddy this persons opinion isn’t worth anything more than a random homeless person off the street. they’re not an expert in this field
Is there a term for this kind of pedantry? Obviously we can put more weight behind the words a person says if they’ve proven themselves trustworthy in prior areas - and we should! We want all people to speak and let the best idea win. If we fallback to only expert opinions are allowed that’s asking to get exploited. And it’s also important to know if antirez feels comfortable spouting nonsense.
This is like a basic cornerstone of a functioning society. Though, I realize this “no man is innately better than another, evaluate on merit” is mostly a western concept which might be some of my confusion.
Evaluate on merit indeed and that is not what is happening. The parent I replied to used an authoritative argument that is not based on (relevant) merit.
Credentialism isn't a fix for the problem you've outlined. If anything, over-reliance on credentials bolsters and lends credence to crazy claims. The media hyper-fixates on it and amplifies it.
We've got Avi Loeb on mainstream podcasts and TV spouting baseless alien nonsense. He's a preeminent in his field, after all.
Focus on what you understand. If you don't understand, learn more.
I believe he found new solace - woodwork[1][2]. Given the state of security and things in general in the IT, I definitely understand. Especially with the AI slop influx. His blog is quite interesting to read though, highly recommend.
that much worse than “hope&change”
or senile grandpa or gw or fucking bill…???! it is like america woke up one morning and was like “wow, trump is bad…” :)
The point is that there is nothing magical or inherently virtuous about democracy. It's always been the best of a bad lot of alternatives, but that was before social media made it possible for bad-faith actors to exploit it so effectively.
Giving stupid people the same political power as everyone else has always been a bad idea, and now it amounts to a suicide pact.
No, I do. Me voting for someone who votes for someone who writes a law is not democratic. I’m far too removed from the process. Maybe it’s you who doesn’t know what democracy is; consider that.
The EU, like almost every democracy ever, is a "representative democracy":
> Representative democracy is a system where citizens vote for officials (representatives) to make laws and political decisions on their behalf, rather than voting on every issue directly, making governance of large populations more efficient while holding elected leaders accountable through regular elections. It's also called an indirect democracy and is the most common form of democracy, seen in the UK (MPs) or India (Members of Parliament).
Direct democracy has historically been completely impracticable. And even with modern comms, I still don't see a way of doing it in practice, personally. The direct democracy of ancient Greece was notoriously corrupt.
reply