Webshit Weekly

On the twitter hack:

Twitter soft-launches its new application programming interface, and in the process demonstrates conclusively that advertising on the platform absolutely does not work. The "Hacker" "News" hall monitors point out that the resulting discussion is so large that the forum software used by "Hacker" "News," written by celebrated programming genius Paul Graham, cannot display more than a couple hundred plaintext comments at once. Hackernews thinks that any attack on Twitter must be part of a grand multinational conspiracy designed to subvert the course of human history, instead of the natural outcome of an absentee CEO hiring a few thousand webshits and disappearing back into a yacht club.

Honorable mention: "OpenAI's GPT-3 may be the biggest thing since Bitcoin"

Only halfway through the year, we are treated to the Hackernewsest headline of 2020. An absolute asshole uses an overgrown Eliza implementation to write a barely-coherent puff piece about itself. This, decides Hackernews, is the beginning of a new era, in which nothing really has changed over previous AI text generators aside from a moderate improvement in the use of punctuation. The only question, debates Hackernews, is whether this new era is destined to have absolutely no effect in any measurable way, or the slightest inching toward a possible future in which OpenAI produces something of use to people who do not run affiliate spamblogs for a living. What a time to be alive!

Previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

16 Responses:

  1. Mark says:

    Sounds about right.

    • Big says:

      I have on occasion wondered whether this blog was written by you, Jaime...

      Whoever’s writing it certainly shares your opinions on the SF Bay Area VC fueled tech/surveillance capitalism “industry”...

  2. Dude says:

    OpenAI's GPT-3 will be the biggest thing since Quibi!

    And Quibi has proven to be the biggest thing since the Zune!

  3. Kyzer says:

    Ah yes, the person who's both amusing and is a shit-for-brains who could, but won't, move their site to https, and bristles at the mere mention of it, repeating their litany against https again and again. Very much the mask-hating Karen of the interwebs.

    • ank says:

      Why do you think that having no https for a static site is a problem? It's the equivalent of a pamphlet, sounds about right to me. Perhaps you'd like to speak to a manager?

      • Kyzer says:

        Well, it's a problem because anyone between you and the site can change the site's contents and you'd be none the wiser. Like that time I hacked http://jerkcity.com so now everyone thinks it's a Jamaican restaurant.

        As it's getting harder and harder to not have the privacy and integrity of your website guaranteed, automatically, for free, writing screeds about how you don't have to wear a masksecure your website is an odd hill to die on.

        • ank says:

          ...and someone may add some text to the pamphlet I’m being handed over. Your point...?

          I love how you present FUD by implying that I’m an anti-mask, anti-science troglodyte for not agreeing with you. It’s not far from republicans yelling nonsense about God at abortion activists.

          • Kyzer says:

            The purpose of a pamphlet is to impart information. I would hope that both the pamphleteer and the recipient care that the pamphlet always says exactly what the pamphleteer wants it to say.

            Re-read the litany against HTTPS on the n-gate website. It's a perfect match for these bullshit lists of reasons why masks shouldn't be worn; nitpicks failing to debunk the overall efficacy of mask-wearing, ultimately just "I don't wanna".

            Tell me why a modern pamphleteer, who has just bought a domain name and hosting, should explicitly turn off HTTPS?

            • ank says:

              Just because you can't fathom why a use case exists doesn't mean it doesn't; it's perfectly acceptable for someone to want to serve a bag of clear bytes to others without mandating that they be verifiable or otherwise complicated by techno-baggage that does not support the basic use case.

              Tell me why would anyone want to complicate this further for a feature they do not want nor care about?

              When masturbatory techno-baggage is all you know, masturbatory techno-baggage is all you can see.

              • root says:

                Quite. I also make jam, which I sell to people in unsealed jars. I mean, it's sterile when it leaves me: I can certify this: my jam-making systems are most secure. And the whole installing-a-lid thing is really a pain to do and takes fractions of a second per jar. After all, it's really not my problem if opportunistic nasties sneak in and breed in it in transit so that what reaches people is not jam but some horrid bacterial stew. Anyone who consumes my jam can always run a battery of very careful tests over it to make sure it is still jam and not jam with added bacteria. These tests are easy to do: I'm sure everyone does them.

                And those lids that tell you if something has got in to the jam by letting you check the vacuum? Yeah those ones: they don't always work you know, and anything that is not infallible is useless, as all true believers understand. There is, after all, only true and false: I reject the notion of fractions, let alone the heresy of real numbers.

                And some of the people who go on and on about jam transit safety, they don't even lock the doors of their jam-making facilities properly! I mean, would you believe it? Anyone could walk in off the street and add anything they want to the jam at source. That completely invalidates anything they say. Of course, if they did lock their doors then what they say would immediately become true: that's how logic works you see. I am very clever.

                Mostly, my customers don't die. Mostly.

                • jwz says:

                  You really didn't think this through, did you?

                  My mom made me some jam. She sealed it with plastic and a rubber band. It was fine and I didn't sue her. The end.

                  Also this whole thread is a deeply stupid derail, all of you please stop.

      • Nick Lamb says:

        Passively not having HTTPS is just background noise. Maybe you just have more important things to be doing. But http://n-gate.com/software/2017/07/12/0/ is quite different.

        That's a rant about about a single-serving site the author disagrees with. A single-serving site aimed at a general audience. Ego-over-inflation warning sirens must have been sounding during the writing of that rant but were ignored.

  • Previously