«Discussing "blockchains" and their externalities without specifying permissionless or permissioned is meaningless, they are completely different technologies. One is 30 years old, the other is 13 years old.»
Compulsory crypto reading. ht @cydharrell
blog.dshr.org/2022/02/ee380-…
Very on point by @KiriRupiah in issue 74 of @thecontinent_ : "If all this was happening in an African country, what do you suppose it would be called?"
PDF: media.mg.co.za/wp-media/2022/…
Still time to get in on the @MindfulBookClub and read the first book by February 25 :) Two weeks left today.
The first book to read is Who Fears Death by @Nnedi Okorafor
mindfulbookclub.axbom.com
↪ Replying to @datakll
@datakll @palace Kan också följas på Twitter 😅
x.com/royalhburpee
↪ Replying to @worldsayer
@worldsayer Really appreciate all your encouragement and dedication to thoughtful reflection Jan. 🙏
Some of you will have seen me using the phrase "Design for universal wellbeing". Yesterday I finally wrote down a few words about why I opt for this phrase rather than "human-centric design".
↪ Replying to @Terejs
@Terejs Verkligen! Jag har även på senaste tiden funderat mycket på hur jag gillar tanken på att återigen ha en fast telefon i hemmet...
↪ Replying to @Terejs
@Terejs Största problemet med detta är förstås att tv-apparater inte har några synliga knappar längre!
Men det finns några sköna lösningar:
- Gör soffkudden till fjärrkontroll (jag gillar!)
- Tejpa fast fjärren på något stort
- Kedja fast fjärren
- Köp en sjukt stor fjärrkontroll
😂
↪ Replying to @Rooperino
@Rooperino Yeah, I could have phrased that better. The laws are what they are. A paragraph in a 10-K, that has been phrased similarly 3 times in the past, I don’t see as a threat. I agree Meta doesn’t want stricter rules, but it is US surveillance laws that are the biggest obstacle now.
So many articles and podcasts talking about Meta *threatening* to leave EU. You know I'm not a fan but this is lazy reporting. They had a bullet point in their 10-K talking about implications of EU law. Not really a threat. If anything, it's encouragement for the US to do better.
Here is the “offending” paragraph in the 10-K that is the source of all the “Meta is *threatening* to leave Europe” reporting. Second paragraph on page 9: d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001326801…
To clarify: I do not believe Meta want stricter rules in the US. My observation is that the biggest obstacle is US surveillance laws giving US intelligence agencies access to foreigners’ personal data without the tech firms able to stop that.
This affects many more than Meta.
Gonna have to be more careful linking to anything from Forbes. x.com/jbenton/status…
↪ Replying to @nicolecommander
@nicolecommander @killnicole @joenatoli Thank you Nicole! 🙏 That really means a lot to me. I remember when I first discovered your inspirational content 😊
x.com/axbom/status/9…
↪ Replying to @charlhyde
@charlhyde @HashtagHeyAlexa Thank you, I used "tone-deaf" recently in a blog post about Spotify's CEO and hadn't considered this. I will change that text now, and make an effort to do better in the future.
↪ Replying to @Interactioneer
@Interactioneer You prompted me to write something to explain my thinking a bit, Kelly :)
x.com/axbom/status/1…
Some of you will have seen me using the phrase "Design for universal wellbeing". Today I finally wrote down a few words about why I opt for this phrase rather than "human-centric design".
axbom.com/design-for-uni…
"Government, academia, industry orgs... are too slow. They need to let go of the old. If only they could embrace new technology, stop fighting it and open themselves up to amazing new opportunities."
This is an example of a tech-centric statement rather than human-centric one.
That said, I try to avoid "human-centric" as a term. It fails to sufficiently acknowledge non-human wellbeing. But for the purpose of the distinction I wanted to point out, it works ;)
I favor: "Design for universal wellbeing."
just like the normal truth, except it’s mostly false… 😂🙏 x.com/saraschaefer1/…
↪ Replying to @Spenen
@Spenen Very valid counterpoints :) Thanks for this. Love diving into the Gettier problem, not something I’ve read about before.
AI algorithms spinning out of control is a feature, not a bug.
No human can work at the speed of the AI to review its input data or process of deduction. That’s the point!
As we dive deeper into the proverbial black box, can the AI actually "know" anything at all?
x.com/carissaveliz/s…