David Watson
@fifthrocket.bsky.social
The takeaway for me was that for anything important is still getting human translation, it’s just that tons of other stuff used to also require human translation, and that market is going away fast.
September 18, 2025 at 9:32 PM
The takeaway for me was that for anything important is still getting human translation, it’s just that tons of other stuff used to also require human translation, and that market is going away fast.
This is a really interesting subject. Here’s a great article including interviews with some professional translators.
www.understandingai.org/p/how-human-...
www.understandingai.org/p/how-human-...
How human translators are coping with competition from powerful AI
Productivity is up and real wages are down, but humans are still in the game.
www.understandingai.org
September 18, 2025 at 9:26 PM
This is a really interesting subject. Here’s a great article including interviews with some professional translators.
www.understandingai.org/p/how-human-...
www.understandingai.org/p/how-human-...
But how will the penguins open the packaging without opposable thumbs?
May 1, 2025 at 2:05 PM
But how will the penguins open the packaging without opposable thumbs?
We're not getting SB 677, but presumably SB 79 was the more important one I hope?
April 23, 2025 at 12:48 AM
We're not getting SB 677, but presumably SB 79 was the more important one I hope?
So maybe she’s not open to changing her mind? 😟
April 22, 2025 at 10:51 PM
So maybe she’s not open to changing her mind? 😟
Owens thinks she may not hold these beliefs strongly and could be convinced to turn back these positions.
I would be careful on preemptively attacking Wahab. Her takes didn't strike me as solidly foundational (or even all that ideological) opinions immune from being moved. They were more reflexive than anything. Negative polarization is a thing and I wouldn't risk it.
April 15, 2025 at 3:45 AM
Owens thinks she may not hold these beliefs strongly and could be convinced to turn back these positions.
Oh yea, gotta try some movies
April 2, 2025 at 7:43 AM
Oh yea, gotta try some movies
I tried a straight-on version of that photo, but I'm not sure I prefer it.
March 19, 2025 at 4:57 AM
I tried a straight-on version of that photo, but I'm not sure I prefer it.
It’s good to personally support things that are morally right but unpopular.
But I voted for Obama and was proud to do so even though he opposed gay marriage.
But I voted for Obama and was proud to do so even though he opposed gay marriage.
March 7, 2025 at 2:28 AM
It’s good to personally support things that are morally right but unpopular.
But I voted for Obama and was proud to do so even though he opposed gay marriage.
But I voted for Obama and was proud to do so even though he opposed gay marriage.
Who’s “everyone”? Didn’t Trump oppose this back when the bill was passed? He’s willing to break the law on funding USAID, he’s willing to break the law on this too.
February 14, 2025 at 4:29 AM
Who’s “everyone”? Didn’t Trump oppose this back when the bill was passed? He’s willing to break the law on funding USAID, he’s willing to break the law on this too.
He already reneged on a bet on COVID no? With Sam Harris I think?
February 6, 2025 at 6:00 AM
He already reneged on a bet on COVID no? With Sam Harris I think?
Folks discussing this on Manifold think it won’t actually happen, apparently something about it being part of the “high seas”
manifold.markets/MaxwellTabar...
manifold.markets/MaxwellTabar...
January 28, 2025 at 6:57 PM
Folks discussing this on Manifold think it won’t actually happen, apparently something about it being part of the “high seas”
manifold.markets/MaxwellTabar...
manifold.markets/MaxwellTabar...
Are you gonna ask Josh Barro about his opinion on this?
January 19, 2025 at 11:41 PM
Are you gonna ask Josh Barro about his opinion on this?
It’s literally what he’s asking for, yes
January 18, 2025 at 10:49 PM
It’s literally what he’s asking for, yes
Not that I approve of the guy, but Tom Cotton said that yesterday. I was honestly surprised he’d break with Trump so loudly.
January 18, 2025 at 8:36 PM
Not that I approve of the guy, but Tom Cotton said that yesterday. I was honestly surprised he’d break with Trump so loudly.
If that was your point, you could have said it! You just successfully expressed the concept in 300 characters.
Maybe I should just complain to Charlie for taking you out of context… but you can see how that post looked on its own right?
Maybe I should just complain to Charlie for taking you out of context… but you can see how that post looked on its own right?
January 18, 2025 at 8:31 PM
If that was your point, you could have said it! You just successfully expressed the concept in 300 characters.
Maybe I should just complain to Charlie for taking you out of context… but you can see how that post looked on its own right?
Maybe I should just complain to Charlie for taking you out of context… but you can see how that post looked on its own right?
Look, @cstross.bsky.social reposted your claim. I follow him, I saw it, I thought “woah, that’s wild” and then before reposting it myself I did like 5 minutes of research and found that the claim is factually false. And now I’m a bit annoyed with you both!
But you feel it is true in your gut. Ok 👍.
But you feel it is true in your gut. Ok 👍.
January 18, 2025 at 7:59 PM
Look, @cstross.bsky.social reposted your claim. I follow him, I saw it, I thought “woah, that’s wild” and then before reposting it myself I did like 5 minutes of research and found that the claim is factually false. And now I’m a bit annoyed with you both!
But you feel it is true in your gut. Ok 👍.
But you feel it is true in your gut. Ok 👍.
You literally said “no mention” pre revolution. I’m not making an argument about Tea Party. If that’s what you’re arguing now…
January 18, 2025 at 7:53 PM
You literally said “no mention” pre revolution. I’m not making an argument about Tea Party. If that’s what you’re arguing now…
Look, I’m not going to argue that “taxation without representation” was definitely the true motivation. But saying the complaint didn’t exist pre revolution is flatly false. Here’s letter from a Pennsylvania Farmer VII, published in January 1768.
![If the parliament have a right to lay a duty of four shillings and eight pence on a hundred weight of glass, or a ream of paper, they have a right to lay a duty of any other sum on either. They may raise the duty as the author before quoted says, has been done in some countries, till it "exceeds seventeen or eighteen times the value of the commodity." In short, if they have a right to levy a tax of one penny upon us, they have a right to levy a million upon us. For where does their right stop? At any given number of pence, shillings, or pounds? To attempt to limit their right, after granting it to exist at all, is as contrary to reason, as granting it to exist at all is contrary to justice. If they have any right to tax us, then, whether our own money shall continue in our own pockets, or not, depends no longer on us, but on them. "There is nothing which we can call our own", or to use the words of Mr. Locke, "What property have" we "in that, which another may, by right, take, when he pleases, to himself."[34]
These duties, which will inevitably be levied upon us, and which are now levying upon us, are expressly laid for the sole purpose of taking money. This is the true definition[77] of taxes. They are therefore taxes. This money is to be taken from us. We are therefore taxed. Those who are taxed without their own consent, given by themselves, or their representatives, are slaves.[35] We are[78] taxed without our own consent given by ourselves, or our representatives. We are therefore——I speak it with grief——I speak it with indignation——we are slaves.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:lro6fd7pk2anz5lesl56r63d/bafkreifplzvdev3obqdkamyrdcruegbaogxgtk234zdprmeisbon6erpdq@jpeg)
January 18, 2025 at 6:21 PM
Look, I’m not going to argue that “taxation without representation” was definitely the true motivation. But saying the complaint didn’t exist pre revolution is flatly false. Here’s letter from a Pennsylvania Farmer VII, published in January 1768.
Most of its reasons are things like “you don’t know germ theory”. It’s fundamentally misunderstanding the prompt!
January 17, 2025 at 6:03 AM
Most of its reasons are things like “you don’t know germ theory”. It’s fundamentally misunderstanding the prompt!