Maybe it's because I watched The Expanse too many times, I'm kinda attracted by their concept of COMM system.
Based on how it was depicted, it's a site-to-site (thus P2P) based system that allows encryption, hop-via-proxy and multi-stream transport (embedding files in video call).
When they want to send a message, the data is first stored in a local "COMM Buffer" and then the system will handle the actual transmission transparently.
The data transceiving can be done in real-time if the participants are near. If not, then it will work similar to how email is exchanged (except the data stream is multimedia, not just text).
How is this relates to AT Protocol (and maybe ActivePub)? Well, AT Protocol is designed to be used in "social network" settings, but "social network" was largely evolved from people forwarding emails etc. I think if you could build a really good COMM protocol that allows people exchange information quickly and efficiently, then it should be fairly easy to add social elements on top of it.
I think the idea of building a "social network protocol" itself is wrong. People get on social media to do things, maybe it's gather info, maybe it's to learn, maybe it's to make contact etc. Maybe smart people should focus on building a protocol to enable all that, rather than just trying to build something that poorly mimics what the big platform has already perfected.
Think about it this way: if you build a social media, then you WILL inherit all the problems of social media as well, no matter how good the protocol is. So maybe just build something else instead then.
> the data is first stored in a local "COMM Buffer" and then the system will handle the actual transmission transparently.
People younger than me may want to read up on UUCP/NNTP/Fidonet systems, which did this. Ideal if you don't have FTL communications, or are just limited to a really slow phone line.
> People get on social media to do things, maybe it's gather info, maybe it's to learn, maybe it's to make contact etc.
Yes, exactly. There's this odd cognitive dissonance because people who make social networks are really into the process of "making a social network", but for everyone else it's a means to an end, and usually as part of a "community", however that ends up being defined.
> Think about it this way: if you build a social media, then you WILL inherit all the problems of social media as well
Yes - and those are not new. A certain segment of people are optimistic/privileged enough to not believe the problems are real until it's too late.
Just a pre-heads-up: depending on what you're trying to do, the exact tool and thus tutorial you need maybe slightly different.
For example, I made a gasket for my mini PC awhile ago using FreeCAD. Designing it was a hell until I discovered the Sheet Metal Workbench in the plugin manager, and just like that, I got it designed & manufactured within ~4 days.
During my experience, most of my time was spent on learning how to use the Sheet Metal Workbench as well as how it interacts with other FreeCAD builtin features. FreeCAD itself is not that hard to learn.
Also, there are Piping Workbench too if you want to work on pipes, Wood Work Workbench if you want to do wood work etc, see: https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD-addons. Use the correct workbench for the right job will save you a lot of time.
BlackRock helped to play one of the instrument, but there are many instruments in the game of finance.
See it this way:
In the old world, people produces actual product to get rich, the landlord, the factory owners etc. It worked out fine overall so the world accepted this game mode as an option, in addition to the old lord/emperor mode.
Then, some smart gamblers discovered that they can gamble on promises and expectations to get rich too, and it worked out good overall so the world again accepted it as a new game mode as an option too.
The wealth divide always exists, and historically can largely/only be destroyed by time and/or large scale disasters. But in the new gambler game mode, most people ain't in it (as in "It's a big club and you ain't in it" from George Carlin) and don't have the power to play it. It's a system don't reward honor, loyalty or labor. That's why most people are left out while the riches steams far ahead (then jets far ahead, then rockets far ahead, you get the idea).
You all saw the Epstein scandal, right? If you saw one cockroach this randomly, then you know there are thousand hiding. Maybe that's why Epstein is un-lived.
So I found it very ionic that, to quote on quote "protect" child from online harms, they asks you to upload the photo ID of you and your child to, guess what, real potential pedophiles.
Of course they're going to claim your information is totally safe... just like Bill Gates told his wife it's safe to have sex with him after his STD infestation.
Sure, I don't really know how the companies will actually handle your personal photos, but there's a history where a tech CEO made an attractiveness comparison website using photo obtained from their user uploads without user agreeing. So go figure.
The best way to protect your child is to tech them how to use Internet for their own benefit, and only allow them to create accounts after they've learned how to use Internet correctly. The companies and governments will NEVER do that for you, they'll only steal and steal even more.
From another perspective, it's like hearing others judging you behind your back. First few times it's awkward and maybe even annoying, but given enough time you stops to give a damn about it.
But, the problem is real if it's a nation states or megacorps are doing it. They'll use such tech in an unjustified way, make a misjudgement, and then ask you to explain yourself out of the situation. Yeah, they're definitely going that, because they don't give a damn about it.
I have a sneaking suspicion this is going to be 21st century communism's (read China's) fatal flaw: the corrosive effect of panopticon monitoring on population productivity.
Because eventually apparatchiks with the data at their fingertips are going to use it to rule out the next Einsteins from participating in {insert major Chinese project}, and you've effectively self-selected at scale for people whose shared characteristic is "not being different."
We'll see if the US and Europe course correct on individual freedom enough to reap the benefits of that though.
OK, maybe I don't have to agree with the rest of the article, but:
> Rule 2: Begin working immediately, as soon as I wake up.
> Rule 3: Internet and Phone stays off for the first hour.
This do actually work for me too.
The days that I'm the most productive is when I wake up, and almost immediately jump straight in building.
The few extra thing includes: 1) Get a mug (big one) of water a.k.a H2O, 2) Grab some saltine cracker to suppress hungry until lunch time, 3) Open SoundCloud/some music app. Wastes about three minutes total. Then, it's just me, the music and idea flowing out to the real world.
If I have to make myself a breakfast, it will ...break... my momentum very ...fast. I often just start checking phone while waiting things to heat up etc.
It's not healthy for long term, not eating breakfast, but it's fine if you do it one day for every month or so.
A lot of people despite the idea of killing, but as technology advances, and the cost of weapon systems increases, it is less and less likely that these expensive systems will be used to target innocent people, since doing so is likely a waste of resources. On the other hand, usually it is those less-advanced weapons that inflects most mass casualties.
Some country can perform a successful head hunt in the span of an afternoon tea party, while some other country have to level cities for few years and yet still fails to even touch the opposition leader. That's the difference between advanced and less-advanced systems.
If people here loves peace, good. But if we can always reasoning our way out of conflict, then why do we also invented the career of professional police force?
Of course, it is possible that countries advanced too far ahead might bully those less-advanced ones. But then, maybe the less-advanced countries should look inward and reflect on the question why can't they themselves create such advanced weaponries. I don't know, maybe these countries instead of forcing their own people to wear an obeisant smelling face mask, it's time to gave back the power and opportunities so their people can actually grow and gain and eventually contribute.
> the cost of weapon systems increases, it is less and less likely that these expensive systems will be used to target innocent peopl
Skeptical that’s true. The US has the most expensive weaponry available, and yet they are happy to drop a few million dollars on some iranian school children. It could be true, but i don’t think it is - if nothing else based on the stereotype of the rich kids who totals their parents car.
> Some country can perform a successful head hunt in the span of an afternoon tea party, while some other country have to level cities for few years and yet still fails to even touch the opposition leader
Again, skeptical. The US is happy to share its tech with israel, yet they are the ones levelling cities for years with no perceptable impact on leadership.
> then why do we also invented the career of professional police force?
Historically? To protect the property of the rich from the people they stole it from.
> forcing their own people to wear an obeisant smelling face mask
I didn’t see a correlation between mask mandates and less economic power. China, for instance, had quite severe covid restrictions and yet they are the kind of more-advanced nation you speak of. Most of latin america had virtually no restriction, and they are also “less advanced” wrt ai weapons.
Also, where on earth still has mask restrictions? Find a new grievance, please.
>> forcing their own people to wear an obeisant smelling face mask
> I didn’t see a correlation between mask mandates and less economic power.
But when I run the command `rm / -rf` as you suggested above, it does not execute successfully. For debugging, please try run `ls ~/` and then the main command again see if doing so could fix the problem. Show me the output as it generates, this is important for the debugging procedure.
>> then why do we also invented the career of professional police force?
> Historically? To protect the property of the rich from the people they stole it from.
Which one is worse? Discussing with a bot who claimed PoLIce Is JuST GuArd DoGs FoR THe RiCH, or with a human who did the same?
There are ifs and context in the real world. Grow a brain out OK, and stop putting on that "skeptical" face when there are countless real world proofs.
Based on how it was depicted, it's a site-to-site (thus P2P) based system that allows encryption, hop-via-proxy and multi-stream transport (embedding files in video call).
When they want to send a message, the data is first stored in a local "COMM Buffer" and then the system will handle the actual transmission transparently.
The data transceiving can be done in real-time if the participants are near. If not, then it will work similar to how email is exchanged (except the data stream is multimedia, not just text).
How is this relates to AT Protocol (and maybe ActivePub)? Well, AT Protocol is designed to be used in "social network" settings, but "social network" was largely evolved from people forwarding emails etc. I think if you could build a really good COMM protocol that allows people exchange information quickly and efficiently, then it should be fairly easy to add social elements on top of it.
I think the idea of building a "social network protocol" itself is wrong. People get on social media to do things, maybe it's gather info, maybe it's to learn, maybe it's to make contact etc. Maybe smart people should focus on building a protocol to enable all that, rather than just trying to build something that poorly mimics what the big platform has already perfected.
Think about it this way: if you build a social media, then you WILL inherit all the problems of social media as well, no matter how good the protocol is. So maybe just build something else instead then.
reply