If you have to use passkeys, try KeePassXC and KeePassXC-Browser. I used them to set one up for Amazon a few days ago, as Amazon now forces passkeys as of this month, at least for my account. It was relatively painless.
It depends what you mean by "not allowed". Breaking ToS isn't a crime, but you might be sued for damages, but how can they show there were any damages?
"Cold calls annoy me" is one angle, and from that perspective, sure.
But "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" is another angle. Because giant corporations may not need to make cold calls. It's the small bootstrapped startup that does.
Hopefully lawmakers will include provisions for small businesses making well-researched calls. Because otherwise, this is just one more way of pulling up the ladder.
Yeah this is something which got on my radar as a potential way to get web development clients, like just call companies with kind of bad websites and see if they need new ones?
This gotta be an outdated way to get business, but regardless of whether this would work on a small scale (havent tried yet) would this be considered spam aswell?
I certainly do. As usual the revolution is weeks away, but I continue to produce work better, faster and more reliably than my colleagues who have outsourced their brains to Claude.
You can tell me I'm not gonna make it and the last 5% is going to topple on the next model release, but the work I enjoy doesn't have precedents and it seems the plagiarism machine is quite bad at that specific flavour of knowledge work.
> I continue to produce work better, faster and more reliably than my colleagues who have outsourced their brains to Claude.
It matters little if your employer does not recognize/value that? Given the quality of most software nowadays, the output of Claude driven by a monkey appears to be perfectly acceptable for a lot of companies.
(yes, there's likely a big reckoning coming where all the slop and tech debt suddenly catches up with them, but that could be a decade off and you still need to pay rent in the meantime)
My employer pushes everybody heavily towards AI, but unsurprisingly that stops the moment the work is late or bad in a way that catches their management chain's attention.
I'm not doing work in the way they tell me to but the results are good enough that my performance reviews / job security is fine. For now!
That has nothing to do with your work being pointless or not (it is), but more you showcasing your insecurity of having to be smarter than your peers because they use LLMs.
Oh, I hadn't even considered the interpretation here where you're saying knowledge work is pointless and always has been. I'm not even going to engage with that one because I see the value and real world impact of my work every single week.
I don't think I'm smarter than my colleagues who use LLMs, for what it's worth. I just have the advantage of continuing to think, try, improve etc.
“Positive” is not required to avoid “pointlessness”. If you think work is pointless, you’re as helpless to argue with as a depressed suicidal. If you want you can easily argue nihilism and everything being pointless. But really?
Absolutely. Across the board I reject that. Knowledge work is still work, knowledge is power. Those who can use knowledge are powerful. For over a decade I've helped transform healthcare businesses into stable, profitable companies that can grow and help more providers help more patients. My knowledge has helped 6 different companies grow and help people. In 6 months my coworkers and I took a company that was losing $15m a year and brought it to break even, and then on to profitable sales of the three different business units into larger companies those units have blossomed with. I cut $2m in spending but improved performance and reliability because I came in with 20 years of knowledge and experience.
I make games, so I was never under the illusion that I was saving the world. But at the same time, art moves you, inspires you, reflects your culture, and overall has its own invisible tug on society.
You can definitely argue my work isn't essential. I'd never say my work is pointless.
One caveat worth flagging: Your AI slop garbage radar won't work on food (no em-dashes, no "it's not X, it's Y" framing, just quiche). That's a real limitation, so calling it out matters. You weren't considering using it on food, but it's important to note that it won't work in order to burn more tokens. I mean provide you with a well rounded answer.
Want me to plan an app that detects food made from AI recipes?
No more anonymous driving, thanks to Flock. Soon, no more anonymous calls, thanks to the FCC.
Your bank already knows everything about you; why not your operating system, too?
Soon your ISP will only let you online if your OS sends them the "right" information: your government ID.
We should also abolish cash while we're at it. The government needs to know every purchase you've ever made, no exceptions.
Of course, then we should tear down used bookstores. They're the biggest risk of all. Anyone can walk in and pick up pieces of paper that teach them dangerous ideas. Other religions. Philosophies. Poetry. How to make things.
What we really need is a nation of drones walking to and fro in the image of our rulers, thinking their thoughts, practicing their religions, and parroting their words. It's the only way to be truly safe.
They want us replaced by machines that are 100% compliant slaves, they're hoping for AI with human capabilities (or better) and no will to pushback at their tyrannical natures.
You're projecting harder than IMAX here with your conspiracy theory tropes. Remember it was the Bolsheviks who actually liquidated entire classes of people as 'useless parasites'.
right, they definitely want depopulation down to the levels their paid hacks tell them is sustainable for a compliant population, "saving the earth", and continue to lives out as gods.
How data-driven policing is sold, spoke to someone who set it up once, good odds FLock is doing it, or in the spirit of the below, Flock doesn't have to do it:
- There are networked webcams everywhere: DoT cameras, 18 wheeler fleet cameras, traffic cams, etc.
- Local PD doesn't want to make a deal with Flock
- For average jane and joe citizenry: great, no Flock in town!
- For ongoing negotiations with Flock and the PD: ok, sure, kick us out of town. But we'll just pull the 18wheeler feeds with the vendor we have an agreement with, as they roll through town. Or the DoT feeds via the State contract we have or the...
- As such, negotiations could land as does local PD at least want the control of the feeds already going through their town with each Sysco big rig delivery?
I am quite confident that there will eventually in any of those cities be some kind of major mass casualty type event that will be attributed to that rejection. I don’t hope for it and am sorry for all of humanity for what we are allowing to seemingly inevitably come about, but here we are; like cattle being herded to the feed lot. “But they’re saying they’ll feed you”, you will hear, “they don’t mean you ill. You should stop being a conspiracy theorists. This food is good.”
We’ll see how it goes, but we also have suits like this that push back on that narrative as if you’re going to say your tech protects against a certain kind of tragedy, and that tragedy actually happens and you didn’t protect against it, maybe you bear some liability.
Every step of the way enabled by useful idiots who think that because each incremental step applies more/cheaper government violence to some class of petty deviants they don't like that it is worth doing even if the overall trajectory created by the sum total of the steps is bad. Selfish jerks.
I don’t think pointing that out will get very far. People didn’t notice when “democracy” was pushed by the same people, in direct contradiction to the Constitution. “Democracy” was the lynchpin to neutralize the Constitution and usher in oligarchic control again, just like digital/programmable currency will complete the pivot of slavery into a total and global system. Why only enslave a few people when you can enslave all people with smoke and mirrors that will make them cheer on their own deception with amusement.
Wonderful! There's a lot of advice online about how essentially evil it is to talk to strangers: They're busy, they have headphones in, they might think you're hitting on them (God forbid; nothing could be more evil than attraction). Ignore it. It often as not boils down to fear and neuroticism from terminally online introverts (and sometimes plain old misanthropists) raised in a hyper-individualist culture and glued to devices sometimes from infancy.
Fair enough if an introvert just wants to be left alone; we should obviously never force our company on anyone (nor do the mentally healthy among us have any desire to do so, because we have empathy). However, people like that will let us know that they don't want to talk when we approach them, either directly or via body language and the nature of their replies. For many others, they're starving for social interaction, and it might make their day for you to reach out. This is what makes outreach worth it, in the end, despite the risk.
I find it so bitterly ironic that the people whose opinions we read the most of - the terminally online Redditors and tweeters - are exactly the kind of people we should not be listening to.
Like you alluded to, the terminally online people who post the most tend to be those with neuroticism, isolation, severe anxiety, etc. There's a famous Reddit post about this I can't seem to find - "Everyone Online Is Insane" or something.
I really think this is why the past decade+ of American culture, politics, and society has been so off-the-wall insane. The Overton Window - another overused Redditism - of society has shifted towards the opinions of the neurotic and anxious. Those are the people whose words fill the comment sections and posts that we all read, which then infuse our minds to expect these thoughts as the baseline/median opinion of society.
> Doesn't matter who you ask on this site. The incel, the rad fem, the regular liberal, the happily married person, the casanova; they will all tell you some variety to stay in your own lane and shut up. They will all use different language, but the meanings will always be the same: they live a life of constant loneliness and have found kinship with others who agree that to ever do something to counter that loneliness is beyond abhorrent behaviour.
Yes, this is a theory I've been thinking about too.
Explains the rise of various political leaders very well.
I find it funny that even the people who comment on the "Everyone Online Is Insane" post sound obsessive or outside the norm.
I find it messes with my mental health when I read too many comments. In the real world I normally find people to be nice and kind. But then I go online and the world is totally different - I have to keep in perspective that its just a small outsized fraction.
> I find it funny that even the people who comment on the "Everyone Online Is Insane" post sound obsessive or outside the norm.
Well, yeah. I agree with the statement that "everyone online is insane", while also recognizing that I myself am online a lot, and think and behave differently from societal norms.
I think that's part of what is needed. There's absolutely nothing wrong with thinking and behaving differently from other people. What's abnormal is when people become absorbed in the internet, to the point that they fail to recognize that people in real life, people outside their Internet echo chambers, think and behave very differently.
> I really think this is why the past decade+ of American culture, politics, and society has been so off-the-wall insane. The Overton Window - another overused Redditism - of society has shifted towards the opinions of the neurotic and anxious. Those are the people whose words fill the comment sections and posts that we all read, which then infuse our minds to expect these thoughts as the baseline/median opinion of society.
Why should anyone entertain this theory? You’re a comment box.
Edit: Thirty years ago us online freaks would just interact with other online freaks. Because normal people had real hobbies.
But now that we are all doomscrollers: why would normal people be interested in the comment boxes of online freaks? They’ve got YouTube shorts and whatever to watch.
That things like 4Chan has had an outsized effect is a different matter. It’s all mediated through twenty layers. It’s not normal people reading 4Chan and other freaks directly.
What's great about neurotic online personalities is that they're all contained within the little box on your lap or in your pocket. You turn it off and they all go away...
They disappear to you, but not to all of the other people who you share a society with who are still staring at their little boxes. And, for better or worse, you still have to live in a world with and share elections with those people too.
I agree, completely, that it's good to get offline. But the pervasive societal effects of extremely online psychology can't be solved simply by opting oneself out of the game.
One great failure of the Internet was taking the lonely crazies and putting them in the position of building their own community online. Unable to moderate their thoughts by interacting with normal people, now feeding off one another's neuroticism, and spreading it.
It's true but then again, for most things, the correct answer is somewhere there, amongst the BS, so if you have a good BS detector and want some ideas, you could do worse. You can't outsource the part where you see for yourself if stuff works, and form your own opinions.
Redditors want you to cut contact with all your loved ones so you can spend more time on reddit, telling people to cut contact with their loved ones. It's like a cult.
> they might think you're hitting on them (God forbid; nothing could be more evil than attraction)
You can find legions of people, particularly women, who do not want to be hit on unless they already find the other person attractive. Being hit on by an unattractive person may even quality for them as something akin to danger, already along the spectrum towards stalking or assault. Has nothing to do with being terminally online and has been reported since long before there was ever an internet.
> For many others, they're starving for social interaction
HN is an international forum, and while people are reporting increased loneliness in many countries, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they want attention from strangers. Where I live, a total stranger talking to you in public is annoying; it is strongly associated with foreigners who haven’t learned yet how to behave acceptably within the local culture. What people might be starving for are serious, long-term social bonds, of the kind that used to be common through large extended families, the parish church, team sports, and school friends who stay put and don’t move away. A mere friendly stranger in public could lead to such real bonds only rarely, so rarely that it’s not even worth considering.
> Being hit on by an unattractive person may even quality for them as something akin to danger, already along the spectrum towards stalking or assault.
Just trying to initiate a conversation with someone simply is not stalking nor assault, even if it is perceived that way. Their "perception" is mistaken in this case.
> HN is an international forum, and while people are reporting increased loneliness in many countries, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they want attention from strangers. Where I live, a total stranger talking to you in public is annoying; it is strongly associated with foreigners who haven’t learned yet how to behave acceptably within the local culture.
I don't know what country you are from, but it is highly probable that even in your culture, public conversations significantly decreased in the past 30 years. Which means that the amount of interactions was higher than it is now, even within the same culture.
> A mere friendly stranger in public could lead to such real bonds only rarely, so rarely that it’s not even worth considering.
The gym example of this article points in the opposite direction, or do you think that gyms in your culture work differently?
It’s their right to decide how they perceive being approached by a stranger. And most of society is going to empathize with them and their feeling of unsafety, not with the stranger approaching them.
> even in your culture, public conversations significantly decreased in the past 30 years
The culture in my country never really had many “public conversations” from one stranger to another. This is something that has been noted by foreign travelers for generations now, at least back to the nineteenth or eighteenth centuries. What has changed are that the substantial family and institutional bonds I mentioned earlier have declined.
> do you think that gyms in your culture work differently?
They definitely do. This has already been mentioned by various people from different countries in this thread.
> It’s their right to decide how they perceive being approached by a stranger.
Okay, I suppose everyone is entitled to their own delusions. But believing that initiating a conversation with a stranger is stalking or assault is just false.
> The culture in my country never really had many “public conversations” from one stranger to another. This is something that has been noted by foreign travelers for generations now, at least back to the nineteenth or eighteenth centuries.
How then do people come to know each other in the first place? Every familiar person has been a stranger at some point.
> They definitely do. This has already been mentioned by various people from different countries in this thread.
I read one of my home country (saying that you would get arrested if you did this) and I assure you it is false.
I am a woman, height is on the shorter side. I want to add my thoughts around this phenomena.
Oftentimes, a stranger coming up to you on the street spells danger, it has nothing to do with how attractive or unattractive they are.
It's hard to explain if you've never been in a woman's shoes, but you feel like prey. A chance conversation can quickly turn into a decades-long stalking event, one never knows. Unwanted attention for women can feel really dangerous, I have often been catcalled/followed when not with my husband (which is infuriating as an adult woman), and have been followed/catcalled on the street from the moment I turned 14, which you can imagine makes strangers coming up to on the street feel loaded.
> You can find legions of people, particularly women, who do not want to be hit on unless they already find the other person attractive.
Tough luck, cupcake. Often you don’t know if she is into you til you approach. Often they are shy. If you keep overthinking this and afraid of being cringe, being filmed or being judged, then your genes will die out and your bloodline will end. But hey, at least you never made anyone awkward and lived a “safe” life. This will sit right with you at deathbed I’m sure.
Computers are feedback loops that ultimately are trying to take up 100% of 100% of people's consciousness seconds, so it makes sense that the winning/dominant ideologies on the internet are just whichever ones cause you to not spend time on anything except the screen.
I have never met anyone on the street who wasn't mentally ill or tried to sell me something. Types like this ignore your brief answers, facial expressions and body language, and continue to yap on. Honestly, I cannot imagine a single situation where a random interaction with a stranger on the street would be a positive experience. No, I do not strive for you to "reach out", on the contrary, I avoid you like a rotting carcass of a pigeon.
In this Northern European country of mine, I’ve got as much of a neutral third party that I can think of: a friend born and raised to adulthood in the Third World. They’ve got more “extrovertism” in them than 99.9% of the natives. Yet this advice from socializing entrepeneurs with One Weird Trick doesn’t seem to hold up. People here are not all hypnotized by their screens and low self-esteem, or whatever, and then lifted up when their poor social-starved selves get attention from a kind stranger. We are just... like that. Not genetic. Not immutable. But it runs deep. Very deep. Deeper than what an “extrovert” all by themselves can penetrate.
So if there is a cultural pathology it takes way more than what socializing entrepeneurs seem to think.
> Fair enough if an introvert just wants to be left alone; we should obviously never force our company on anyone (nor do the mentally healthy among us have any desire to do so, because we have empathy). However, people like that will let us know that they don't want to talk when we approach them, either directly or via body language and the nature of their replies. For many others, they're starving for social interaction, and it might make their day for you to reach out. This is what makes outreach worth it, in the end, despite the risk.
[deleted]
> However, people like that will let us know that they don't want to talk when we approach them, either directly or via body language and the nature of their replies. For many others, they're starving for social interaction, and it might make their day for you to reach out. This is what makes outreach worth it, in the end, despite the risk.
Nope.
Normal people—not freaks like me—in my culture will fume in private. Yes: any slight by a stranger will be relegated to complaints to your friends. Much more likely than sending any bad vibes. We’re cowards like that.
I’m reminded of some anecdote about Westerners being struck by how helpful Japanese people are. (This is from memory and may be wrong.) The context is that they are tourists. Well, apparently Japanese people have very strict social norms about being polite and helpful. This is amazing for tourists: they get all of the social upsides while not having to pay anything in return (because they are oblivious to it).
I will happily stop and chat with you if you demonstrate that it is worth the time and interruption (if I was lost in thought, that will take at least 5-10 minutes to get back to).
If not, I will not let you know. I will just fume, blame and judge you for some time after.
"Hey sorry, I've got some things on my mind right now and can't really talk. Have a nice day though".
That takes less than 10 seconds to say, let's you protect your time and peace of mind, and as a bonus there's no need for fuming, blaming, and judging that the other person won't ever even know about.
The people likely to talk to strangers unprompted are also likely to ignore those kind of messages. Anything that can lead to further conversation can be used (like "oh, what's worrying you?") so actually politely nodding and smiling without giving any footing to further conversation works better than being assertive.
I don’t think it’s false, much less obviously false. On one hand I have my personal experience about it, on the other you can see there’s only a small range in the “I want a conversation” scale where they want it enough to ignore the nonverbal signs that the person doesn’t want to talk but not enough to ignore the verbal ones.
This is 100% completely on you, then. If you don't inform people you're being interrupted or that what they are doing is bothering you, they have no data to telling them to stop, and any energy you spend on silently judging them or being frustrated is only harming yourself.
No, it's on you. You can stop before you even begin by simply not interrupt and bother people for no reason. You're creating a problem and then blame me for not stopping it.
You realize _anytime_ someone needs to talk to you would qualify as interrupting and bothering someone else? Your expectation is unreasonable. Good luck with that.
Not paying per token? Not sending my code to someone else's servers for inference? That's the stuff of sweet dreams for a stingy, paranoid solopreneur like me.
If I could run a local model comparable to even Sonnet 4.6 without shelling out $50K in hardware, I'd do it in a heartbeat. But all I have is a 32 GB of RAM and an old RTX 4080.
Or am I not up to speed? Are there decent coding models that can run on dev laptops? Not that that's what you were suggesting by recommending a local model, necessarily; just curious.
I am trying to figure this out too... what I am seeing is that the local models like Qwen 3.5 family that fit on hardware like yours handle ambiguity poorly. But are capable of emitting complete apps too.
That said, I don't like passkeys either.
reply