In addition to everything else said downstream of your comment, I want to point out that there is a recent trend of legislation quickly being introduced across several states at once, as evidenced by the rash of "social media" teen bans and such.
It is unrealistic for many to move states or live in their ideal state, but we don't even live in the "50 different options" world anymore.
Corporate and NGO interest groups are seeing to it that your politicians and journalists are controlled from the municipal to national levels. Tribal two-party politics has reduced our world to "red" and "blue" states, and plenty authoritarian legislation has bipartisan support.
You also can't just keep playing whack-a-mole and uprooting your entire life each time a state you considered safe suddenly introduces legislation you disagree with.
Some would even argue that it isn't very patriotic to flee a community and allow it to rot instead of participating in its liberation.
Full-stack JavaScript-focused engineer/entrepreneur with lots of experience in building scalable single page apps in different frameworks, web3, multiplayer web games, building transformers and other networks, all sorts of things. Product-oriented, executive and leadership experience, comfortable in both autonomous and collaborative settings, capable Linux sysadmin. I know how to ship, end to end.
I've focused for several years now on agentic and generative work such as simulating networked LLM-augmented embodied agents, interface research, too much to list here but always happy to talk more over email. While the rest of the industry is just starting to latch onto agentic systems, I can offer years of experience, product insight and leadership.
Available for consulting, startups, projects, anything web or agentic.
This marketing copy is so obviously written by an LLM and not a domain expert, and that currently signals to me that I should not take the company or its products seriously, because who knows what other corners they were willing to cut.
Terence Tao, one of the most important living mathematicians, specifically embraces Lean and has been helping the community embrace it.
What you've done here is an overgeneralization. "People who like math" and "people who like computers" are massive demographics with considerable overlap.
Formalised proofs and Lean in particular are still too cumbersome for the ``working'' mathematician to use it day-to-day for research-level math. But clearly there is some interest on where it may take us in future.
He's a Field's Medalist so that's automatically one of the most important living. He is good at explaining things; I leaned on his Analysis textbooks when I was taking analysis and functional analysis to great effect; in a research class I was trying to calculate Fourier transforms of algebraic sets and found various almost throw away comments on his blog that were extremely enlightening (alas only to the extent I could follow them). He's a legit great mind of modern mathematics - and also able to communicate well; a historical rarity indeed.
The topic being discussed here has been addressed specifically in his mastodon posts - the pre-LLM math process was understood to be "state a proof, validate a proof" - but the real aim was the not explicit "digest the proof so we can extend to other results" - with LLM/lean making the first two a lot easier and possible to do without accomplishing the digestion into the mathematical community; so we need to add "digesting proofs (from where ever)" into the job description. Thread starts here: https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao/116477351524980995
I've been in the bad habit of not publicly publishing a lot of my more interesting projects from the last few years, but I also consult and would love to talk shop. Happy to share code and projects over email. Even if your current workload is outside my wheelhouse, it would be good to make a connection. Email in bio.
Well, Cryptocurrencies are part of said new era. They aren't strictly a problem that made things worse: they're a technology that comes with tradeoffs. The cat is out of the bag and we have to design around technologies that are here to stay in whatever capacity. Distributed, cryptography-based currencies/tokens are one of those technologies.
Yes, on the one hand, they enable a lot of shady illegal business, but in the other hand, they also destroy the environment while doing it, so it's really a toss up whether cryptocurrency is good or bad overall!
Equating the concept of cryptographic currency with specific implementations such as proof-of-work just shows that you have no idea what you are talking about.
The importance of financial sovereignty can not be understated, whether you understand that or not.
> What problems are solved by financial sovereignty?
It's right there in the name. Some people believe that their assets should not be freezable or restricted by the whim of their local government-of-the-week. Cryptocurrencies have obviously solved this problem quite well or people wouldn't be complaining about how it has enabled more cybercrime (specialists, include cyber criminals, are often quicker to adopt trends than society at large).
Moving beyond that, the utility of a cryptographic smart contract system paves the way for the future of the internet. People forget computers are less than a hundred years old, and that there are thousands of years of computing ahead of us. The fundamentals will look very different one day.
Inability to evade the justice system is not something that most people would agree is a problem; quite the opposite. The rule of law is the thing that allows you and I to live in such relative splendor. If you remove the ability for courts to operate you will not be in a libertarian utopia, you will be a dystopian free for all where there is no one to uphold contracts or stop people from doing what they like when they have even a bit more power than you.
> The rule of law is the thing that allows you and I to live in such relative splendor
Speak for yourself, I grew up in poverty. I also said nothing about Libertarianism and did not endorse it; Please do not inject your biases, patronize or turn this into a straw man. Do you want to actually address my argument?
bitcoin is forecast to uses about 150 TWh of electricity this year vs all other datacenter operations foretasted to use 1000 TWh. Bitcoin is esitimated to be about 52.4% sustainable energy (renewables plus nuclear) where datacenters are 42% sustainable energy.
And those other datacenters are mostly doing useful things, while bitcoin is somewhere between pure waste and the least efficient way of doing security ever conceptualized. (A few dozen centralized nodes, set up right, would likely be more secure than the current mining pools.)
Crypto has been an awful development in many ways, but I happily welcome it when it has made malware so much more benign to me. The last malware that affected me personally was a crypto miner worm, and the one before that was a crypto wallet stealer, neither of which affects me at all as I don't meddle with crypto.
I don't know the statistics, but it seems like it's way more profitable for the grifters to target other grifters instead of taking over my machines and extorting me. Or maybe I just got lucky.
> when it has has made malware so much more benign to me.
Eh?
Cryptocurrencies have enabled ransomware. Possibly the most nasty malware to hit the internet in terms of damage caused...
This damage has affected services you use (including hospitals, schools, research institutions and local government) even if it hasn't infected one of your boxen directly.
I love my country quite literally to death. Death plays a strong role in the concept of freedom in American philosophy: Give me liberty, or give me death (yes, I know the real context of this quote), etc.
And so when my government wants to destroy my country, its land and its people, divide us, commodify us and our life experiences, and also export this kind of systematic industrial exploitation across the world, through colonies and coups and political assassinations; yeah, I hate that government a lot. I hate it to death. The American government has been an enemy to America, and an enemy to Americans. Since the beginning, with our treatment of the natives.
You'd do well to separate the land, people and government of a nation; confusing them only further serves State propaganda. We force children to say a pledge to our country in school, but it's really to our government. It's political brainwashing. I have refused to say the pledge since becoming politically aware enough around age 7. I cannot tersely express the amount of institutional abuse I suffered for this position. Teachers would ostracize me, bully me, punish me, attempt to physically force me to say it, write me up for detention, get my guardians to abuse me at home over it, etc. Like I said, the American government is a psyop.
The pledge is not to some painted cloth or the current government but the community of people you are part of and the decision of who leads them, made thru free and fair elections.
I really thought about its meaning as someone that chose to come here and join this community out of my own free will. IDN, Perhaps people that are taught to memorize it as children simply regard as mantra and never think about its meaning.
PS: There is no country on Earth that doesn't have some sort of pledge, most often to fatherland/motherland or even a King or Tyrant.
I would love for you to explain how the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance is not a form of youth brainwashing.
I've already discussed how I was personally targeted in my scholastic years as they only person in my schools refusing to participate, so you already knows what happens if you exercise your first amendment rights.
> made thru free and fair elections
Where? What does "free" or "fair" mean here? It is not a secret that the US is a failed democratic republic that looks more like an inverted totalitarian state today. It's hard for things to be "fair" when there exists a vast capital asymmetry between those writing the law and those "voting" for it. Lobbyists, state actors and NGOs deploy billions of dollars into brainwashing the public about the US's image and actions, both domestic and foreign.
We are a neoliberal colonial state, that even in this exact moment are actively attempting to expand our colonial reach.
> PS: There is no country on Earth that doesn't have some sort of pledge
And my grandfather used to say, as he beat me viciously, "This is nothing, you should have seen what my father used to do to me." Historical presence does not justify anything, and never has.
Well as I explained children reciting the pledge, few really think about its meaning like you did. They simply reciting a memorized line, as dry and boring as the arithmetic table.
Yes lobbying and money in politics is a problem, but people are not as gullible as you seem to believe. The California wealth tax passed, despite billions spent against it. On the other end, Harris outspent Trump by millions and was still effectively crushed.
Often grass-roots movements are far more effective then big-money campaigns.
What America has are Client-States, Countries that are subordinate. but this is nothing unusual, and can be beneficial for a country with little power of its own. In-fact many former colonies have ended up becoming Client states to their Former European masters. In contrast Colonies are directly controlled with imposed Governors, backed by a military force of the Colonial Master.
> few really think about its meaning like you did. They simply reciting a memorized line, as dry and boring as the arithmetic table
I was raised in the Catholic church and it's the same style of blind, rote memorization -> brainwashing. And to that point, sneaking "under God" into the pledge was a disgusting move that weakens a core tenet of American philosophy and law, the separation of Church and State. Each and every further recitation weakens it further, and all who participate are complicit in weakening our democracy.
> people are not as gullible as you seem to believe
Not sure where any notion of gullibility was discussed prior to this.
> Often grass-roots movements are far more effective then big-money campaigns.
How often? Want to share some numbers that paint a different picture than 250 years of American history? Our treatment of the natives? The centralization of wealth and power accelerated by the Industrial revolution?
The authoritarian ratchet of American politics is well-studied and frequently discussed. Temporary wins have not prevented the overall trend towards the US government increasing federal power and becoming an inverted totalitarian colonial state.
> What America has are Client-States, Countries that are subordinate. but this is nothing unusual
It is not what the spirit of the United States was about. The federal government was never meant to be this powerful. It has been twisted and abused into something considered "normal" but it is in no way the intended state.
> In-fact many former colonies have ended up becoming Client states to their Former European masters. In contrast Colonies are directly controlled with imposed Governors, backed by a military force of the Colonial Master.
Yes, that is neoliberal colonialism. Just ask Greenland how they have been doing. They ended their status as a colony in 1953 after establishing a Constitution. A few years later, Denmark began systematically castrating women in secret, a common tactic for preventing a nation from attaining real political sovereignty and power by controlling their population levels.
I'm not even going to go into what else Denmark has done to Greenland, or what has come out of other such relationships between "former colonies" and their political masters. The occasional outlier is an exception to the rule, not proof to the contrary.
We can look at how the US treats colonies right now by looking at colonies such as Puerto Rico or Guam, which are historically oppressed through social and financial means. And we can examine our current foreign meddling in dozens of countries, or our history in participating in non-democratic regime changes in other countries. The bottom line is that the US government is a psyop and anyone who is a patriot to this country, its land and its people should understand the US government is an enemy to those things.
And the pledge is meant to convey allegiance to a symbolic flag and government, not to its land or people. Again, this can be evidenced simply by observing the routine punishment I received for not participating and comparing the pledge to other cult rites. This is Hitler Youth level shit. I was lucky enough to eventually go to a high school with a principal who refused to do morning pledges for my final scholastic years.
> One objection is that a constitutional republic built on freedom of dissent should not require its citizens to pledge allegiance to it, and that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right to refrain from speaking or standing, which itself is also a form of speech in the context of the ritual of pledging allegiance.
> Another objection is that the people who are most likely to recite the Pledge every day, small children in schools, cannot really give their consent or even completely understand the Pledge they are making.
> Another criticism is the belief that a government requiring or promoting the phrase "under God" violates protections against the establishment of religion guaranteed in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Growing up in the Southern US, I met plenty "Let's bomb all the savages in the Middle Easy and take their oil" types. Some of them grew up to be self-proclaimed Nazis.
I'm not sure I agree. Given that the area in question here is the southern United States, and considering that racism is alive and well there, indeed with people groups they have met (and who speak English), I'm not convinced that exposure to non-whites speaking Farsi will somehow fix their attitude.
These people are racist against non-whites living in their own communities, whom they have spent their entire lives with. Meeting a dark-skinned stranger in a turban is a chance for them to confirm and bolster their biases, not to reduce them.
And even if they go through some kind of traumatic experience with a stranger from the Middle East and call them friend, it wouldn't stop the racism. I know plenty of racists with "black friends" who will tell you all about how "there are black people, and then there are n**rs". Some of their black friends will even parrot this kind of propaganda.
Fight Chat Control is a website maintained by a European. It is no more anti-European than I, an American, speaking about the latest antics of our conservative-led government and saying, "The US government is attempting to ____".
It is unrealistic for many to move states or live in their ideal state, but we don't even live in the "50 different options" world anymore.
Corporate and NGO interest groups are seeing to it that your politicians and journalists are controlled from the municipal to national levels. Tribal two-party politics has reduced our world to "red" and "blue" states, and plenty authoritarian legislation has bipartisan support.
You also can't just keep playing whack-a-mole and uprooting your entire life each time a state you considered safe suddenly introduces legislation you disagree with.
Some would even argue that it isn't very patriotic to flee a community and allow it to rot instead of participating in its liberation.
reply