I agree. Also, it's not like the whole internet will be under ID check. One can still opt out and don't use the main stream social media? My hope is that ID check is targeting never ending feeds of crappy content.
That said, I am very concerned about how things work privacy wise today (even without ID check).
While I see the point, I think I more often encounter the opposite. Duplication, but not exactly duplication.
Then the "sunk cost fallacy" is not an issue but there is huge maintenance cost and no-one feels like refactoring it. I'd rather refactor bad abstraction than 10x duplication.
> The pathology of generative AI is that it too easily allows substantial form without discernible intent. That mistake is harder to make when creating by hand.
I love the post. I feel generating AI content is like doing informational compression (weirdly enough, by bloating up the size).
When giving it a prompt, the "normalized AI brain" guesses the intent based on what's the most plausible. All the diverse human brains get filtered, bucketed, here you go, this is the "standard artifact".
And yes, it is a compression because real life is not one shot prompt. If I get an unclear message from my colleague, I ask for clarification. If the message is bloated by AI and some information is added, it already scraped some of the real intent by bucketizing it. Sometimes it may be what the original author meant. Sometimes not.
I don't know what is anyone's motivation in compressing the facts by making text longer and harder to read. This whole.email generation idea is bizarre.
> Whether or not the information is accurate isn't really the point. It's that it serves as a way to identify you even without cookies.
Exactly. A few weeks ago, there was an article about the age limit for social media. And everyone was full of criticism on how it affects privacy. But when there is a post about how browser profile serves de facto as a user identifier, then people are "Of course, what's the problem? We all know that, that's the way it has to be".
I am still fascinated by how convincing the AI slop can be. I saw way too much code and documentation which made no sense. But it's often not obvious. I read it, I don't get it, I read it again, am I just stupid? I can grab some threads from it, but overall, it just doesn't make sense, it doesn't click for me. And that's when I often realize, it doesn't click, because it's a slop. It's obvious in pictures (e.g., generate a picture of a bike with labels). But in code? It requires more time to look at it than to actually write it. So it just slips reviews, it sometimes even works as it should, but it's damn hard to understand and fix it in the future. Until eventually, nothing can fix it.
For the record, I use AI to generate code but not for "vibecoding". I don't believe when people tell me "you just prompt it badly". I saw enough to lose faith.
That said, I am very concerned about how things work privacy wise today (even without ID check).