34
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2024
34 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
1384 readers
152 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This display of a man hoping AI reclaims the awe in technology he once felt as a 17 year-old:
Sam Altman is the snake oil salesman who might restore Silicon Valley to its former glory https://sfstandard.com/opinion/2024/06/25/opinion-ai-altman-silicon-valley-revival/
unironically saying "the sharing economy" in the year of our lord 2024 is... certainly a choice
also
idk dude I've talked to the rest of the world about this and most of them actually seem to dislike this technology, it seems like maybe you didn't actually try very hard to be cynical
Its former* superfund glory.
*Oh wait https://mastodon.social/@ashleygjovik/112668309100333232/
One last hurrah for the EPA and the clean air act before the scotus shanks the administrative state in a day or two.
I've had this open in a background tab, reading it in pieces as time allows, and I only just noticed one of it exhibits one of the things I like noticing about various publishers' system fucking up: a lurking page title before a post-publish edit
the page title as it is in my browser right now:
Opinion | AI boom led by antihero Altman is reviving Valley dreams
. the page title as it displays in the content area:Opinion \n Sam Altman is the snake oil salesman who might restore Silicon Valley to its former glory
.the url slug also seems to be mostly the former - most of these renames on various publishing platforms seem to do that (keep the original slug instead of a rewrite+redirect)
can't make direct guesses as to the exact reason why this one was updated whenever it was, but I expect public perception/reception might've been part of that?
it is also something that's been of passive interest to me over some years: things as published often shift underfoot, and the time at which someone reads something then shares on and then someone else reads ... there might be quite a substantive difference in the contents of such things at the times. this ranges from the benign (inserting late-received comments, errata, etc), to a complete contextual/content rework. I've often thought that there's a possibly for a really interesting part project there...