All I can see is ASL

Not that I’ve seen, but I know some people who somehow missed the video, and he doesn’t link to it on the website so:

https://youtu.be/w70Xc9CStoE

I bet if such a law existed in less than a month all those AI developers would very quickly abandon the “oh no you see it’s impossible to completely avoid hallucinations for you see the math is just too complex tee hee” and would actually fix this.

Nah, this problem is actually too hard to solve with LLMs. They don’t have any structure or understanding of what they’re saying so there’s no way to write better guardrails… Unless you build some other system that tries to make sense of what the LLM says, but that approaches the difficulty of just building an intelligent agent in the first place.

So no, if this law came into effect, people would just stop using AI. It’s too cavalier. And imo, they probably should stop for cases like this unless it has direct human oversight of everything coming out of it. Which also, probably just wouldn’t happen.

Yes, because when you run systems like that, you use the AI, and you have the people as a fallback for when the AI fails.

It was primarily watched by people in India because the AI was failing the vast majority of the time.

So yeah, the state of the art AI is… Failing at its job 70% of the time. Instead of the hoped goal of 5%.

That’s more “device” pairing than “parts” pairing. The thermostat to HVAC communication is a standard. Sure, if someone started forcing that, that’d be bad. But that’s more akin to Apple’s “iOS only works with MacBooks” type shit with Airdrop and such than it is to their “you can’t replace the camera in your phone unless it’s from us”. They’re both problems, but the one you’re describing is both not happening and a different issue. I’m not saying it won’t happen but it’s a different topic.

What… The… Fuck?

If your thermostat could cause a fire or gas leak, your HVAC system is flawed. This is entirely a fabricated concern. If anything, I’d chalk it up as reasons why maybe right to repair the HVAC isn’t a great idea. A properly setup HVAC wont let anything tell it to do that.

Firstly, I said this one was iffy to me.

Second, the subtopic was HVAC and thermostats are like, the electronics that control the HVAC which I wouldn’t even really necessarily bucket into HVAC. It’s like HVAC adjacent.

Third, this whole topic is about right to repair, not right to replace. So the on topic argument is “you want to be able to repair the same thermostat with off brand parts”, to which I say, yes? Probably? I don’t see how that’s a problem.

And fourth, who the fuck would buy an Amazon thermostat, lmao.

Yeah that’s totally valid. Agreed.

But I also wouldn’t really trust third party parts for the appliance itself. I think once you do, that immediately becomes a possible problem. If it was in my house, I’d only buy from the manufacturer for something like that.

But on the other hand, Idk that it’s necessarily wrong to legislate forcing these companies to allow it. I generally believe consumers should have the option on their own, but some things are too dangerous. I’d pretty much be against medical devices but HVAC is a little more uncertain to me.

I mean, I don’t want the thing supplying the air I’m breathing to accidentally not burn all the gas and lead to carbon monoxide poisoning etc… Things like the ductwork and shit, for sure, but not like, a burner.

“Florida is on the front lines of the warming climate crisis, and the fact that we’re going to erase that sends the wrong message,… It sends the message, at least to me and to a good majority of Floridians, that this is not a priority for the state.”

What do you mean “sends the wrong message?” This 100 percent is NOT a priority for the state. When the state tells you who they are, believe them.

I could see an argument about medical devices, HVAC, and vehicles… But I don’t think I’d agree with them. Except maybe medical.

Consoles and toothbrushes though? What the fuck?

I’m actually shocked to find how many people agree with the OPs sentiment, but maybe there’s something about the demographics of who’s using a FOSS Reddit alternative or something. I’m not saying everyone is wrong or has something wrong with them or whatever, but I entirely agree with people finding this valuable, so maybe I can answer the OPs question here.

I’ve been working remotely long since before the pandemic. I’ve worked remotely for multiple companies and in different environments. I am extremely introverted and arguably anti social. I tend to want to hang out with many of my friends online over in person. But that doesn’t mean I think there’s no advantage at all. To be honest, when I first started remote work, I thought the in person thing was total bullshit. After a few meetings my opinions drastically changed.

I’ve pushed (with other employees, of course) to get remote employees flown in at least a few times a year at multiple companies. There are vastly different social dynamics in person than over video. Honestly, I don’t understand how people feel otherwise, especially if they’ve experienced it. I’ve worked with many remote employees over the years and asked about this, and most people have agreed with me. Many of these people are also introverted.

I think one of the big things here is people harping on the “face” thing. Humans communicate in large part through body language - it’s not just faces. There’s also a lot of communication in microexpressions that aren’t always captured by compressed, badly lit video. So much of communication just isn’t captured in video.

Secondly, in my experience, online meetings are extremely transactional. You meet at the scheduled time, you talk about the thing, then you close the meeting and move on. In person, people slowly mosy over to meetings. And after the meeting ends, they tend to hang around a bit and chat. When you’re working in an office, you tend to grab lunch with people. Or bump into them by the kitchen. There’s a TON more socializing happening in person where you actually bump into other people and talk them as people and not just cogs in the machine to get your work done.

I find in person interactions drastically change my relationships with people. Some people come off entirely different online and it’s not until meeting them in person that I really feel like I know them. And then I understand their issues and blockers or miscommunications better and feel more understanding of their experiences.

Maybe things are different if you work jobs with less interdepencies or are more solo. I’ve always worked jobs that take a lot of cooperation between multiple different people in different roles. And those relationships are just way more functional with people I’ve met and have a real relationship with. And that comes from things that just don’t happen online.

Im honestly really curious how anyone could feel differently. The other comments just seem mad at being required to and stating the same stuff happens online, but it just doesn’t. I do wonder if maybe it has to do with being younger and entering the workplace more online or something. But I’ve worked with hundreds of remote employees and never heard a single one say the in person stuff to be useless. And I’ve heard many say exactly the opposite.

The idea that plane safety is tied to everyone together agreeing to and remembering to push a button on their devices is absolutely insane. You think that the regulating bodies that require multiple backups for every possible system also just trust that every passenger pushes a button and every flight attendant actually checks every passengers devices?

No no no, you’re missing the important piece

On April 1, 2023, three undercover agents met with Faye… Faye asked if the undercover agents were federal law enforcement.

They didn’t have to say yes, because it was April fool’s day!

or other expensive setups

As much as I lost trust in his bullshittery a long time ago, his need to mention the cost of critical safety systems is what stuck out to me the most here. That’s how you know the priorities are backwards.

This whole thread is a whole lot of hullabaloo about complaining about legality about the way YouTube is running ad block detection, and framing it as though it makes the entire concept of ad block detection illegal.

As much as you may hate YouTube and/or their ad block policies, this whole take is a dead end. Even if by the weird stretch he’s making, the current system is illegal, there are plenty of ways for Google to detect and act on this without going anywhere remotely near that law. The best case scenario here is Google rewrites the way they’re doing it and redeploys the same thing.

This might cost them like weeks of development time. But it doesn’t stop Google from refusing to serve you video until you watch ads. This whole argument is receiving way more weight than it deserves because he’s repeatedly flaunting credentials that don’t change the reality of what Google could do here even if this argument held water.

A bunch of these are also utter bullshit. “Purchase history” sounds like they can go through and read your Amazon purchases or something - they can’t. Diagnostic data sounds scary, but I’d rather use an app collecting diagnostic data because the alternative is a buggy mess. Them tracking what you do in their app is way more help than it is dangerous. Stuff like device ids and such are also likely only pulled for that reason or to confirm your purchases with them, etc.