presumably if they become as popular as software, they would...

I'd think it would be allowed for UK to:

1. Tell 4chan or its registrar l to take down .co.uk urls (maybe?)

2. Tell UK ISPs to ban UK visitors from viewing 4chan

They can, but they have to ask a court to enforce any sort of block. I imagine that's coming soon.

Now that you mention it, that's probably why they sent this letter. They know it's pointless but they want a paper trail to show they tried to find other solutions before requesting a block.

It's entirely up to 4chan to voluntarily comply and avoid any further consequences.

yeah but it's 4chan, they won't, the biggest consequence is they get blocked in the UK. And the kind of people that go there will be more than savvy enough tto use a VPN

> Tell UK ISPs to ban UK visitors from viewing 4chan

Too bad the UK public can't effectively tell Ofcom off.

I feel like one benefit of humans is you can find someone you can truly trust under almost all circumstances and delegate to them.

With AI you have a thing you can't quite trust under any circumstance even if it's pretty good at everything.

Like a proverbial broken clock which shows correct time twice per 24 hours, AI may "show correct time" for 99% of prompts, but doesn't deserve any more trust.

A hammer doesn't always work as desired, it depends on your skills plus some random failures. When it works however, you can see the result and are satisfied with it - congratulations, you saved some time by not using a rock for the same task.

I can trust a hammer will be a hammer, though.

Not a crazy idea. Sergey at Google said it's best at replacing managers fwiw

why isn't he doing it then?

You really think governments could write rules that would help this?

The only rule I can imagine is big penalties for data being breached, no matter the cause, but do we actually think it's a multi million dollar problem for 70k photos to be released? Hard problem.

I run a team of about fifteen people and for whatever reason I've never really understood or driven toward legibility. What's the point? For me getting to know and trust each person and to develop an understanding of what they are good at is the key thing I focus on. Good work follows.

Actually knowing minutiae of what they do seems like make work to me.

You and I are in a similar boat. We have the luxury of avoiding "big organisation" problems that mean people need, or want, legibility. And I will do everything I can in my career to keep it that way!

surely it's the goal of most pricing strategies, though, right?

I hate the US healthcare system but I don't support using the word murder in this context. Murder is very very different from trying to help a person but being greedy while doing it.

I think murder is an appropriate term. There is a long history of company leadership making decisions that they know will lead to the death of thousands of people. See tobacco, opiates, leaded gas and many others. And they are not trying to help people while being greedy but they are only greedy without being motivated to help people.

Forgot insurance.

> trying to help a person but being greedy while doing it.

The doctors are trying to help people, the execs are being greedy while doing it. Leadership doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt at this point.

Plenty of docs making the better part of a million dollars.

Buddy, six figures is about 3 short of the amounts we’re talking about here.

Yea, we have to stop villainizing people who are making "a better part of a million dollars." The real villains are the ones making a better part of a billion dollars or more.

But it’s not “a person”. It’s millions of them.

I agree it's really sad and fucked up. But the way we deal with murder is long prison sentences and the death penalty. If we introduce horrible incentives for investing in medicine, we won't get compassionate care, we will just eliminate investment in healthcare.

We need really thoughtful incentives and simple policies that let doctors run hospitals. Idk it's hard - I was going to say we should reward them for providing better care but I know the pay for performance system in place also hasn't worked that well.

Single payor system would solve a lot of problems as insurance companies and the economic system/incentives they’ve created in healthcare is the root cause of a lot of the issues. Also, it’s such a large and relatively unnecessary value extraction layer (middleman) that we’d immediately have many more dollars going towards providing care than to running of insurance companies and their owners. Even the hospitals and other providers have to employ armies of people just to understand how to bill things properly in this unnecessarily complex ecosystem. It’s a massive waste of resources in the name of capitalism that does nothing to improve the care provided.

It’s even worse when considering these companies profit more by denying care altogether.

Yes, it's much worse.

With no queen how could they reproduce down there after the originals died of old age though?

From the article:

> They were not reproducing, though. Instead, the population was being replenished through sheer accident.

So you're saying the article itself has information about what the article contains?

Fascinating.

I try not to get my heart rate up.

I spent last night bemoaning the sad internet culture of negativity and sarcasm and hatred... But this post made me laugh.