d-m.bsky.social
Also here: https://infosec.exchange/@_dm
Infosec, Trust & Safety, but mostly screaming into the void
[ttl=14d]
125 posts
223 followers
270 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
I’m honestly surprised that I ^F the article and Chris Dixon’s name turns up absolutely nowhere.
What’s the point of being a vapid crypto thought-leader if you don’t get to consult when a federal agency wants to use blockchains for some completely stupid purpose?
comment in response to
post
*Actual* AI--which DOGE certainly isn't--is already mostly a black box with little explainability or accountability. It's really the perfect cover for a kleptocracy masquerading as a technocracy.
comment in response to
post
As a related point, see this absolutely baffling comment in this Ezra Klein interview.
I have no idea what weird media the guest is consuming, but it's telling--and worrisome--that "what DOGE is doing is using AI to improve government efficiency" is, like, some sort of meme out there.
comment in response to
post
Eh, you know what they say about wrestling with a pig. You get dirty, and the pig gets away with statutory rape because the DOJ inexplicably drops the investigation.
comment in response to
post
Long-time Microsoft employees might still have t-shirts that say, "I survived Bedlam": www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/c...
comment in response to
post
But you're playing with fire here, Steven. If you train the filter to think the emails about spam are spam, it's going to send you an email about that, which will result in a feedback loop that might, I dunno, destroy the universe? Divide by zero? Fill up your mailbox quota?
comment in response to
post
Can you mark the message about the spam as spam?
comment in response to
post
It's more technological than ideological, the iterative communications revolutions and how they brought us more nationalized politics eventually sorting into two highly homogenized parties. There's no undoing that. We are Linz-susceptible now. We can't recreate the old barriers, we need new ones.
comment in response to
post
Great. What procedural mechanisms will you use to hold up Trump appointees until the looting stops?
Or are these just strongly worded letters?
comment in response to
post
Ah, yes, the fable of the elderly man who cried wolf.
comment in response to
post
To a degree, I've noticed that at a big company, _acting_ like you have a certain authority or role can make it somewhat self-fulfilling.
I didn't think it worked that way in the federal government, but, uh...apparently it does?
comment in response to
post
Obviously all of this ends terribly badly at some point, probably not too far away, but I think there's a case to be made that Trump is good for markets, for some (very short-term) definition of "good".
comment in response to
post
If you take all of that as a given, Trump's introduction of massive uncertainty is surely a *good thing* for market participation: retail investors will find investing *more fun*, and put more money into it. Valuations will go up (and down and up and down and up)!
Plus, you neuter the SEC...
comment in response to
post
And if we're in an asset bubble--which seems quite arguable for equities--then another way to view it is just that for many investors, valuations are not about fundamentals, but about, I dunno, memes?
comment in response to
post
And there are a lot of new products on the market, like leveraged ETFs, that expressly exist to make retail investing more fun. (OK, they exist to give retail investors exposure to more volatility, but that's sorta the same thing, right?)
comment in response to
post
There's clearly a significant *retail investor* demand for what Matt Levine calls "fun markets." Like, the US stock market is an order of magnitude bigger than cryptocurrency markets, but cryptocurrency is still *big*.
comment in response to
post
I mean the entire Trump phenomenon of "can I slam my dick in a car door?" feels very Brexit-ish.
comment in response to
post
Well, giving up citizenship is a taxable event, so I'd at least want to make back enough to cover the taxes due. ;)
comment in response to
post
Oh man, this is a great idea.
Now that I have a second nationality, I can:
- Give up my US citizenship, which yields fairly significant tax savings
- *Sell* my US citizenship to someone else; it apparently has a face value of about $5m