Politics is frequently a game of semantic drift. The application of labels with unclear meaning to further dilute meaning or extend it for the purpose of engagement, legal reclassification... it's not engineering and you can't expect well defined terms from people who want power without accountability.

Politics doesn't work if a significant part of the leadership is constantly acting in bad faith, and behaving essentially sociopathically.

Voters' and citizens' (and some judges') willingness to support sociopathic behavior by leaders is a profound failing at their basic social duties, and is deeply shameful.

> Politics doesn't work if a significant part of the leadership is constantly acting in bad faith, and behaving essentially sociopathically.

Not to be too contrarian, but I'm certain there are many people who would claim that's the only way it has ever worked (poorly)

People always feel like that to a certain extent, but both quantitatively and qualitatively there have been very dramatic shifts in the past few decades in the USA.

You don't see how those conditions amplify each other?

Most major industrialized nations have gone through something like this and it usually takes much longer than 10 years to escape and correct.

It isn't. It's about convicting generational groups, particularly the younger ones that don't know any better, that they have specific preferences.

Why should open weights correlate with cost? Cost correlates with the expense of running the model more than it does to the expense of developing the model.

Social media in it's current form is already dying to the explosion in synthetic interaction but the internet could survive and reshape itself.

It would be so simple if businesses could choose their competition or simplify disallow modes of competition they found inconvenient. I can't imagine any amount of regulation would make that possible in today's competitive landscape with the existing laws and the enormous volume of prior art.

This news is a month old.

You should really look into who Jack Conte is and why he created Patreon. He's a smart guy who relies heavily on maintaining a positive social image and is more emotionally aware and stable than most tech founders. I imagine from his perspective the decision, severance and post were all just the smart thing to do.

His name is Jack, and I would describe him as a deeply weird narcissist. You got the "relies heavily on maintaining a positive social image" part right.

That was a typo... thanks. I wasn't suggesting that he or anyone else is 100% altruistic but he seems like he genuinely thrives on collaboration.