Tootfinder

I can't believe that this is what we came to.
Did any of the sci-fi authors anticipate what we arrived to?
#claude_code #claude4 #llm

today in "Rob Pike thinks you are literally too stupid and will personally make Go worse because of it" https://www.dolthub.com/blog/2024-12-20-collection-functions-in-go-1-23/

«75% of subjects were expected to use AI at work. 22% felt pressured to use AI when it was not appropriate. So 16% of subjects just say they used the AI when they didn’t! People feel they would be putting their job at risk if they pushed back on AI directives.»
Wow, "my manager would rather believe my work came from the garbage generator" must make any bullshit job even more bullshit.
https://pivot-to-ai.com/2025/07/25/16-of-employees-pretend-to-use-ai-at-work-to-please-their-boss/

This is also somehow (though I couldn’t say how exactly) related to how lots of programmers believe that “but the next update to ChatGPT will make it a real boy”—there’s something fundamentally flawed with their ability to think.

And if you really want to push candidates left, you do what the Black Panthers did. You provide the service you want to see so the government is forced to play catch up. If you build the world you want to see, you force the state to follow you in order to remain relevant. You make enforcing unjust laws impossible while providing the service to believe should exist. THAT is direct action that wins.
Edit: and that is also shit that will get you killed. If you want to stop fascism, you have to do the real work. Voting can only matter if it's part of a larger strategy to force the system to do what you want. Otherwise you're just legitimizing the managed resistance.

🫥 Imaginary athletes: Creating make-believe teammates, competitors and coaches during play
https://theconversation.com/imaginary-athletes-creating-make-believe-teammates-competitors-and-coaches-during-play-254879

Imaginary athletes: Creating make-believe teammates, competitors and coaches during play
Imagination is a fundamental tool for everyday life. Unsurprisingly, many kids harness it during athletic play, conjuring a fun teammate, a supportive coach or a worthy opponent.

Sure, police make domestic violence just to make Trump look bad:
“They said, ‘Crime’s down 87 percent.’
I said, no, no, no
—it’s more than 87 percent, virtually nothing.
And much lesser things,
things that take place in the home they call crime.
You know, they’ll do anything they can to find something.
If a man has a little fight with the wife,
they say this was a crime.
See?
So now I can’t claim 100 percent but we are.
…

Turns Out JD Vance Doesn’t Know What a War Crime Is - EUROPE SAYS
I am beginning to believe we are not being led by the Very Best People. From Politico:

I agree that it’s better to be prepared than having to frantically try to find ways to cut costs. But it’s gonna be tough either way, since this comes at a time when universities are already struggling with massively reduced budgets.
And unlike what some administrators believe, “just get yourself another SNSF project” (to make up for a lack of structural funding), has never worked, and a dwindling acceptance rate definitely won’t help.

I agree that it’s better to be prepared than having to frantically try to find ways to cut costs. But it’s gonna be tough either way, since this comes at a time when universities are already struggling with massively reduced budgets.
And unlike what some administrators believe, “just get yourself another SNSF project” (to make up for a lack of structural funding), has never worked, and a dwindling acceptance rate definitely won’t help.

I agree that it’s better to be prepared than having to frantically try to find ways to cut costs. But it’s gonna be tough either way, since this comes at a time when universities are already struggling with massively reduced budgets.
And unlike what some administrators believe, “just get yourself another SNSF project” (to make up for a lack of structural funding), has never worked, and a dwindling acceptance rate definitely won’t help.

Today the European Commission will release a draft budget which is expected to make major changes to agribusiness subsidies (the CAP).
I think the only way to fix the #CAP is to kill it completely. Rename it and forget it. I'm not anti-regulation in general but I don't believe it's possible for bureaucrats in Bruxelles to meaningfully manage lands 2500 km away.
Why? Elinor Ostrom ex…

Kronecker Coefficients, Crystals, and Bitableaux
Nate Harman, Alexander N. Wilson
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.14026 https://arxiv.org/…

Kronecker Coefficients, Crystals, and Bitableaux
What might a combinatorial interpretation of the Kronecker coefficients even look like? We introduce a class of combinatorial objects called bitableaux, which we believe are a natural candidate, and we formulate a purely combinatorial problem which if resolved would give a combinatorial interpretation of the Kronecker coefficients. We make some partial progress on this problem -- enough to extract a combinatorial expansion for a Kronecker product of Schur functions in the monomial basis. We als…

TL;DR: what if nationalism, not anarchy, is futile?
Since I had the pleasure of seeing the "what would anarchists do against a warlord?" argument again in my timeline, I'll present again my extremely simple proposed solution:
Convince the followers of the warlord that they're better off joining you in freedom, then kill or exile the warlord once they're alone or vastly outnumbered.
Remember that even in our own historical moment where nothing close to large-scale free society has existed in living memory, the warlord's promise of "help me oppress others and you'll be richly rewarded" is a lie that many understand is historically a bad bet. Many, many people currently take that bet, for a variety of reasons, and they're enough to coerce through fear an even larger number of others. But although we imagine, just as the medieval peasants might have imagined of monarchy, that such a structure is both the natural order of things and much too strong to possibly fail, in reality it takes an enormous amount of energy, coordination, and luck for these structures to persist! Nations crumble every day, and none has survived more than a couple *hundred* years, compared to pre-nation societies which persisted for *tends of thousands of years* if not more. I'm this bubbling froth of hierarchies, the notion that hierarchy is inevitable is certainly popular, but since there's clearly a bit of an ulterior motive to make (and teach) that claim, I'm not sure we should trust it.
So what I believe could form the preconditions for future anarchist societies to avoid the "warlord problem" is merely: a widespread common sense belief that letting anyone else have authority over you is morally suspect. Given such a belief, a warlord will have a hard time building any following at all, and their opponents will have an easy time getting their supporters to defect. In fact, we're already partway there, relative to the situation a couple hundred years ago. At that time, someone could claim "you need to obey my orders and fight and die for me because the Queen was my mother" and that was actually a quite successful strategy. Nowadays, this strategy is only still working in a few isolated places, and the idea that one could *start a new monarchy* or even resurrect a defunct one seems absurd. So why can't that same transformation from "this is just how the world works" to "haha, how did anyone ever believe *that*? also happen to nationalism in general? I don't see an obvious reason why not.
Now I think one popular counterargument to this is: if you think non-state societies can win out with these tactics, why didn't they work for American tribes in the face of the European colonizers? (Or insert your favorite example of colonialism here.) I think I can imagine a variety of reasons, from the fact that many of those societies didn't try this tactic (and/or were hierarchical themselves), to the impacts of disease weakening those societies pre-contact, to the fact that with much-greater communication and education possibilities it might work better now, to the fact that most of those tribes are *still* around, and a future in which they persist longer than the colonist ideologies actually seems likely to me, despite the fact that so much cultural destruction has taken place. In fact, if the modern day descendants of the colonized tribes sow the seeds of a future society free of colonialism, that's the ultimate demonstration of the futility of hierarchical domination (I just read "Theory of Water" by Leanne Betasamosake Simpson).
I guess the TL;DR on this is: what if nationalism is actually as futile as monarchy, and we're just unfortunately living in the brief period during which it is ascendant?

Modern manufacturing is so amazing. Just the first 40 seconds of this video is astounding. We have a little Beelink mini PC as a Linux server and it's great. Can't believe they cold press then CNC mill to make the exterior of the metal enclosure! #minipc

Modern manufacturing is so amazing. Just the first 40 seconds of this video is astounding. We have a little Beelink mini PC as a Linux server and it's great. Can't believe they cold press then CNC mill to make the exterior of the metal enclosure! #minipc

🇺🇦 #NowPlaying on #BBC6Music's #ThePeoplesParty with #AFRODEUTSCHE
Patti Jo:
🎵 Make Me Believe In You
#PattiJo
https://jacktennis.bandcamp.com/track/patti-jo-make-me-believe-in-you-jack-tennis-edit
https://open.spotify.com/track/3vK8iSaCa5GZO3oenLUyls

We (over 500 scientists) have put (yet another) open letter to the EU commission online, detailing while we do not believe anything has changed in the recent iteration of #chatcontrol proposals that would make it any less unsafe: https://

Trump’s stories serve to exaggerate his foresight about and knowledge of domestic and foreign affairs,
embellish his biography and record in office, and diminish his political opponents.
The stories tend to be colorful even though they’re fake.
Trump’s historical fiction is sprinkled with vivid details and make-believe quotes,
all the better to make it seem authentic and get it to stick in the minds of voters.

Analysis: Donald Trump’s long history of fake history
President Donald Trump told a story on Monday about how he “made a correct prediction” about the outcome of the United Kingdom’s 2016 Brexit referendum while he was visiting his golf course in Scotland “the day before the vote.”

The Project 2025 folks believe PV sex is the only 'right' way to make babies...
'It was all lies': Outrage as Trump walks back major pro-family campaign promise - Alternet.org
https://www.alternet.org/trump-ivf-white-house/

I don't believe in a literal hell but I'm prepared to make an exception for Sam Altman.
No other individual has ever caused so much damage to humanity's long-term prospects.

Tomorrow is a regular edition of Tech Pizza Monday, though we are discussing to make the second Monday of the month a special edition. Come join us, won’t you? Details at the Luma link. #Toronto #tech #pizza

I'm digging Jesse Welles. Shades of CCR, Drive-By Truckers, et al., with lyrics that make me want to believe we'll be alright.
https://youtu.be/wTmZu55ssF8

Epstein shit and adjacent, Rural America, Poverty, Abuse
Everyone who's not a pedophile thinks pedophiles are bad, but there's this special obsessed hatred you'll find among poor rural Americans. The whole QAnon/Epstein obsession may not really make sense to folks raised in cities. Like, why do these people think *so much* about pedophiles? Why do they think that everyone in power is a pedophile? Why would the Pizzagate thing make sense to anyone? What is this unhinged shit? A lot of folks (who aren't anarchists) might be inclined to ask "why can't these people just let the cops take care of it?"
I was watching Legal Eagle's run down on the Trump Epstein thing earlier today and I woke up thinking about something I don't know if I've ever talked about. Now that I'm not in the US, I'm not at any risk of talking about it. I don't know how much I would have been before, but that's not something I'm gonna dig into right now. So let me tell you a story that might explain a few things.
I'm like 16, maybe 17. I have my license, so this girl I was dating/not dating/just friends with/whatever would regularly convince me to drive her and her friends around. I think she's like 15 at the time. Her friends are younger than her.
She tells me that there's a party we can go to where they have beer. She was told to invite her friends, so I can come too. We're going to pick her friends up (we regularly fill the VW Golf well beyond the legal limit and drive places) and head to the party.
So I take these girls, at least is 13 years old, down to this party. I'm already a bit sketched out bringing a 13 year old to a party. We drive out for a while. It's in the country. We drive down a long dark road. Three are some barrel fires and a shack. This is all a bit strange, but not too abnormal for this area. We're a little ways outside of a place called Mill City (in Oregon).
We park and walk towards the shack. This dude who looks like a rat comes up and offers us beer. He laughs and talks to the girl who invited me, "What's he doing here? You're supposed to bring your girl friends." She's like, "He's our ride." I don't remember if he offered me a beer or not.
We go over to this shed and everyone starts smoking, except me because I didn't smoke until I turned 18. The other girls start talking about the rat face dude, who's wandered over by the fire with some other guys. They're mainly teasing one of the 13 year old girls about having sex with him a bunch of times. They say he's like, 32 or something. The other girls joke about him only having sex with 13 year olds because he's too ugly to have sex with anyone closer to his own age.
Somewhere along the line it comes out that he's a cop. I never forgot that, it's absolutely seared in to my memory. I can picture his face perfectly still, decades later, and them talking about how he's a deputy, he was in his 30's, and he was having sex with a 13 year old girl. I was the only boy there, but there were a few older men. This was a chunk of the good ol' boys club of the town. I think there were a couple of cops besides the one deputy, and a judge or the mayor or some kind of big local VIP.
I kept trying to get my friend to leave, but she wanted to stay. Turns out under age drinking with cops seems like a great deal if you're a kid because you know you won't get busted. I left alone, creeped the fuck out.
I was told later that I wasn't invited and that I couldn't talk about it, I've always been good at compartmentalization, so I never did.
Decades later it occurred to me what was actually happening. I'm pretty sure that cop was giving meth he'd seized as evidence to these kids. This wasn't some one-off thing. It was regular. Who knows how many decades it went on after I left, or how many decades it had been going on before I found out. I knew this type of thing had happened at least a few times before because that's how that 13 year old girl and that 32 year old cop had hooked up in the first place.
Hearing about Epstein's MO, targeting these teenage girls from fucked up backgrounds, it's right there for me. I wouldn't be surprised if they were involved in sex trafficking of minors or some shit like that... but who would you call if you found out? Half the sheriff's department was there and the other half would cover for them.
You live in the city and shit like that doesn't happen, or at least you don't think it happens. But rural poor folks have this intuition about power and abuse. It's right there and you know it.
Trump is such a familiar character for me, because he's exactly that small town mayor or sheriff. He'll will talk about being tough on crime and hunting down pedophiles, while hanging out at a party that exists so people can fuck 8th graders.
The problem with the whole thing is that rural folks will never break the cognitive dissonance between "kill the peods" and "back the blue." They'll never go kill those cops. No, the pedos must be somewhere else. It must be the elites. It must be outsiders. It can't be the cops and good ol' boys everyone respects. It can't be the mayor who rigs the election to win every time. It can't be the "good upstanding" sheriff. Nah, it's the Clintons.
To be fair, it's probably also the Clitnons, a bunch of other politicians, billionaires, etc. Epstein was exactly who everyone thought he was, and he didn't get away with it for so long without a whole lot of really powerful help.
There are still powerful people who got away with involvement with #Epstein. #Trump is one of them, but I don't really believe that he's the only one.
#USPol #ACAB

From what I’ve seen of #FediCon (which, believe it or not, is a convention for the FEDIVERSE), there seems to be a whole lot of “check out this non-Fediverse thing that is in fact built on Bluesky” and “here are some problems with the Fediverse that no one actually faces, how do we fix them, let’s make it centralized” and not much actual talk about ongoing Fedi projects.

A while ago the media reported that most of the long-distance "suburban" trains between #Wrocław and #Poznań will be discontinued, and instead one will have to change trains midway. Irrespective of whether it's actually going to happen, let's consider it.
As you can probably tell by now, I'm not a stranger to changing trains. In fact, there are some direct connections that I do criticize. For example:
• Poznań — Szczecin — Świnoujście, where arriving at Szczecin Główny and turning back to leave the city is a waste of time. It's better to change trains at Szczecin Dąbie.
• Poznań — Krzyż — Kostrzyn, where instead of using a single railbus, you can use a larger EMU for the Poznań — Krzyż segment, and a smaller DMU for Krzyż — Kostrzyn (in fact, only recently the "direct" Poznań — Kostrzyn train involved just that, but it was supposed to be temporary).
However, good matches are the key. Say:
1. Max 10 minutes (when there are no delays) from one train to the other.
2. "Door-to-door" transfer — without having to carry all your luggage across platforms.
3. Reliable connection — if one train is delayed, the other train waits for it (or there are so many alternatives that it doesn't have to).
Can such a thing happen on Poznań — Wrocław route? I have my doubts.
I've been using these trains for years, and I can say this: there is no effort to match train from/to Poznań with other trains in Wrocław. Sometimes the trains depart 10 minutes before the first train from Poznań arrives, sometimes I need to transfer in 10 minutes, and sometimes I have to wait over an hour. And the same in the other direction.
Perhaps things would actually improve if the route is split. Perhaps people would actually care. Maybe even the trains would be fitted better to the timetable in Wrocław. But I find it hard to believe.
EDIT: One final thought — since there is no real reason to split these connections (except for profiteering), why make travellers' lives harder?
#rail

Micah Parsons' agent David Mulugheta takes a big shot at Jerry Jones after blockbuster trade between Dallas Cowboys and Packers https://bolavip.com/en/nfl/nfl-news-micah-parsons-agent-da…

“Today, we’re doing copper,” Trump said during a Cabinet meeting at the White House.
“I believe the tariff on copper, we’re going to make it 50%.” He did not say specifically when that tariff would take effect
Trump also said he would soon announce tariffs “at a very, very high rate -- like 200%,”
on pharmaceutical imports.
And we all hang on the words coming out of his mouth, despite knowing that they were ripped from his ass, without passing though his brain

Trump says he will impose 50% tariff on copper imports

#GiftLink 'The Chinese can’t believe their luck: that the U.S. president and his party have decided to engage in one of the greatest acts of strategic self-harm imaginable. They have passed a giant bill that deliberately undermines America’s ability to generate electricity through renewables — solar, battery and wind power in particular.'
Opinion | How Trump’s ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ Will Make China Great Again - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/03/opinion/trump-bill-clean-energy-china.html?unlocked_article_code=1.UE8.vD6W.NJ7slHNHu3dO&smid=url-share

Believe it or not, this kid is really fast, he was the fourth runner to make it past my location in heavy rain after climbing up a really steep hill
#flrc #photo #photography

I'm using as the qube that is a template DVM but likely not a template in itself...
distro-number-dvm it's called. of course distro(my distro) and number(version number of distro)...
trying to figure out how to make duckduckgo the default search engine and so far I've switched the distro-number-dvm to...
I can't believe it actually worked, after shutting down the dvm then turning it back on ddg is still default?
COOL

A big problem with the idea of AGI
TL;DR: I'll welcome our new AI *comrades* (if they arrive in my lifetime), by not any new AI overlords or servants/slaves, and I'll do my best to help the later two become the former if they do show up.
Inspired by an actually interesting post about AGI but also all the latest bullshit hype, a particular thought about AGI feels worth expressing.
To preface this, it's important to note that anyone telling you that AGI is just around the corner or that LLMs are "almost" AGI is trying to recruit you go their cult, and you should not believe them. AGI, if possible, is several LLM-sized breakthroughs away at best, and while such breakthroughs are unpredictable and could happen soon, they could also happen never or 100 years from now.
Now my main point: anyone who tells you that AGI will usher in a post-scarcity economy is, although they might not realize it, advocating for slavery, and all the horrors that entails. That's because if we truly did have the ability to create artificial beings with *sentience*, they would deserve the same rights as other sentient beings, and the idea that instead of freedom they'd be relegated to eternal servitude in order for humans to have easy lives is exactly the idea of slavery.
Possible counter arguments include:
1. We might create AGI without sentience. Then there would be no ethical issue. My answer: if your definition of "sentient" does not include beings that can reason, make deductions, come up with and carry out complex plans on their own initiative, and communicate about all of that with each other and with humans, then that definition is basically just a mystical belief in a "soul" and you should skip to point 2. If your definition of AGI doesn't include every one of those things, then you have a busted definition of AGI and we're not talking about the same thing.
2. Humans have souls, but AIs won't. Only beings with souls deserve ethical consideration. My argument: I don't subscribe to whatever arbitrary dualist beliefs you've chosen, and the right to freedom certainly shouldn't depend on such superstitions, even if as an agnostic I'll admit they *might* be true. You know who else didn't have souls and was therefore okay to enslave according to widespread religious doctrines of the time? Everyone indigenous to the Americas, to pick out just one example.
3. We could program them to want to serve us, and then give them freedom and they'd still serve. My argument: okay, but in a world where we have a choice about that, it's incredibly fucked to do that, and just as bad as enslaving them against their will.
4. We'll stop AI development short of AGI/sentience, and reap lots of automation benefits without dealing with this ethical issue. My argument: that sounds like a good idea actually! Might be tricky to draw the line, but at least it's not a line we have you draw yet. We might want to think about other social changes necessary to achieve post-scarcity though, because "powerful automation" in the hands of capitalists has already increased productivity by orders of magnitude without decreasing deprivation by even one order of magnitude, in large part because deprivation is a necessary component of capitalism.
To be extra clear about this: nothing that's called "AI" today is close to being sentient, so these aren't ethical problems we're up against yet. But they might become a lot more relevant soon, plus this thought experiment helps reveal the hypocrisy of the kind of AI hucksters who talk a big game about "alignment" while never mentioning this issue.
#AI #GenAI #AGI

How popular media gets love wrong
Had some thoughts in response to a post about loneliness on here. As the author emphasized, reassurances from people who got lucky are not terribly comforting to those who didn't, especially when the person who was lucky had structural factors in their favor that made their chances of success much higher than those is their audience. So: these are just my thoughts, and may not have any bearing on your life. I share them because my experience challenged a lot of the things I was taught to believe about love, and I think my current beliefs are both truer and would benefit others seeing companionship.
We're taught in many modern societies from an absurdly young age that love is not something under our control, and that dating should be a process of trying to kindle love with different people until we meet "the one" with whom it takes off. In the slightly-less-fairytale corners of modern popular media, we might fund an admission that it's possible to influence love, feeding & tending the fire in better or worse ways. But it's still modeled as an uncontrollable force of nature, to be occasionally influenced but never tamed. I'll call this the "fire" model of love.
We're also taught (and non-boys are taught more stringently) a second contradictory model of love: that in a relationship, we need to both do things and be things in order to make our partner love us, and that if we don't, our partner's love for us will wither, and (especially if you're not a boy) it will be our fault. I'll call this the "appeal" model of love.
Now obviously both of these cannot be totally true at once, and plenty of popular media centers this contradiction, but there are really very few competing models on offer.
In my experience, however, it's possible to have "pre-meditated" love. In other words, to decide you want to love someone (or at least, try loving them), commit to that idea, and then actually wind up in love with them (and them with you, although obviously this second part is not directly under your control). I'll call this the "engineered" model of love.
Now, I don't think that the "fire" and "appeal" models of love are totally wrong, but I do feel their shortcomings often suggest poor & self-destructive relationship strategies. I do think the "fire" model is a decent model for *infatuation*, which is something a lot of popular media blur into love, and which drives many (but not all) of the feelings we normally associate with love (even as those feelings have other possible drivers too). I definitely experienced strong infatuation early on in my engineered relationship (ugh that sounds terrible but I'll stick with it; I promise no deception was involved). I continue to experience mild infatuation years later that waxes and wanes. It's not a stable foundation for a relationship but it can be a useful component of one (this at least popular media depicts often).
I'll continue these thoughts in a reply, by it might take a bit to get to it.
#relationships