Disqus - Latest Comments for danielmiessler

Re: Tesla – Craig Smith

Daniel Miessler — Thu, 02 Jul 2020 01:59:23 -0000

They have way fewer quality issues just by being more simple.

But more quality issues due to some little stuff.

After 7 months, the little stuff has faded into the background and I only notice how simple and dependable the car is.

And I have the 3 Performance as well.

Biggest annoyance examples are like road noise sounds, a shitty trunk experience, annoying door handles. Etc.

And biggest counter example is that I usually am listening to something like a podcast so I never notice. And well, driving is just perfection.

In short, the positives massively outweigh the negatives. Massively. This is from someone who's had 90K+ BMWs for the past 10 years.

My vote is that you should do it.

Re: Amplifi Alien WiFi Router

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 07 Jun 2020 17:17:30 -0000

Nice!

Re: COVID-19… What has really changed?

Daniel Miessler — Thu, 14 May 2020 11:02:25 -0000

https://media2.giphy.com/me...

Re: The Data Protection Discipline

Daniel Miessler — Wed, 06 Nov 2019 19:27:30 -0000

Love it.

Re: Astrophotography – Craig Smith

Daniel Miessler — Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:50:06 -0000

So awesome, man!

Re: Yes, Determinists, There Is Free Will - Issue 72: Quandary - Nautilus

Daniel Miessler — Wed, 22 May 2019 18:06:07 -0000

Saying you did something just because the components that did it live WITHIN YOU is no different than saying computers did something becaue the matter involved was INSIDE the computer.

And this emergence argument is specious. It wants to say that airplanes are real, but at the atomic level there's no such thing as airplanes. So just because there's no such thing as free will at the physics level doesn't mean it's not real at the human level. Sure. But that also applies to Leprechauns and Ra the Sun God.

The best model for looking at free will is looking at the last outcome/decision that was made. Could it have been different? Given all the inputs that combined from a physical standpoint, a genetic standpoint, and an environment standpoint. Could it could have happened any other way? No. It couldn't have. Becasue physics is in charge of that. And whether it's purely deterministic or it's random, it's still MECHANISTIC, and we are part of the mechanism—not a control knob.

Until someone can illustrate how we're OUTSIDE the system instead of being part of it, people cannot argue true free will. PRACTICAL free will, sure. Effective free will. Sure. Free Will that we might as well accept. Sure. It's a useful concept.

But it's a construct we use for practical reasons, not a physical reality.

It's like God in that way. Can anyone deny that God plays a part in the lives of billions of people in the world? I don't think so. But God isn't real. So both can be true at the same time.

Re: A Visual Breakdown of Intellectual Dark Web (IDW) Political Positions

Daniel Miessler — Fri, 12 Apr 2019 03:42:25 -0000

Pro means for.
Con means against.
Green means more Liberal.
Red means more Conservative.
Gray means uncertainty.

Re: A Visual Breakdown of Intellectual Dark Web (IDW) Political Positions

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 07 Apr 2019 15:40:49 -0000

You should read my other piece about the IDW where I specifically say we need a set of IDW values to keep those people out.

https://danielmiessler.com/...

I'm worried about the far-right spoiling this as well, but it won't be happening on my watch.

Re: A Visual Breakdown of Intellectual Dark Web (IDW) Political Positions

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 07 Apr 2019 15:33:44 -0000

I don't know how you see anything other that objectivity in this piece, Tex.

I didn't say I agreed with all these people. I don't. And specifically Shapiro and Peterson I disagree with a lot.

What I'm saying is that if we want to avoid scoring another liberal own-goal on ourselves (i.e., Trump elected again in 2020), we need open conversation between people willing to have it.

Otherwise we give the extreme right (which none of these people are part of) full control over the minds of millions.

We can't let that happen, and conversation is the antidote.

Re: A Visual Breakdown of Intellectual Dark Web (IDW) Political Positions

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 07 Apr 2019 09:30:51 -0000

Fixed. Thanks.

Re: A Visual Breakdown of Intellectual Dark Web (IDW) Political Positions

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 07 Apr 2019 01:03:54 -0000

Hey, just a heads-up, someone took over your account and made your avatar a rebel flag.

Re: A Visual Breakdown of Intellectual Dark Web (IDW) Political Positions

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 07 Apr 2019 00:41:47 -0000

I hear you on that, but that just makes him confused if he's liberal on all the points I have in the graph.

Re: A Visual Breakdown of Intellectual Dark Web (IDW) Political Positions

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 07 Apr 2019 00:40:32 -0000

Thank you!

Re: The Insane Reaction to Renée DiResta on the Joe Rogan Podcast

Daniel Miessler — Mon, 25 Mar 2019 12:44:45 -0000

Tell me what I'd see if I were to wake up.

Re: Some Thoughts on Dataism

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 24 Mar 2019 23:03:46 -0000

Reading the book will remove those fears. He's just a historian worried and curious about the future.

Re: The Insane Reaction to Renée DiResta on the Joe Rogan Podcast

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 24 Mar 2019 23:00:39 -0000

What's a better narrative? Genuinely asking.

Re: The Insane Reaction to Renée DiResta on the Joe Rogan Podcast

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 24 Mar 2019 23:00:14 -0000

Wouldn't you come to this conclusion no matter what unless I arrived at the conclusion you endorse?

Re: The Insane Reaction to Renée DiResta on the Joe Rogan Podcast

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 24 Mar 2019 22:59:16 -0000

What's a better narrative? Genuinely asking.

Re: The Insane Reaction to Renée DiResta on the Joe Rogan Podcast

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 24 Mar 2019 00:42:26 -0000

Weren't they specifically doing that to show that it was possible? As a demonstration?

Her explanation of that seemed quite transparent and convincing.

It reminds me of penetration testing, where you get hired to break into a place by showing you can, and then someone says:

> Sure, but who should believe people who break into places?

I'm prepared to be wrong about this, but did you see her on the podcast? Did she strike you as a con artist?

And if so, how does it happen to perfectly fit with the massive campaigns unearthed by the New York Times and other major papers, where they covered the various meme efforts extensively?

The scale of the conspiracy would have to be massive.

Like, Climate Change Conspiracy massive.

Re: The Need for Post-Capitalism

Daniel Miessler — Sat, 16 Mar 2019 18:43:54 -0000

Technocracy is tech leaders, and that sort of Philosopher King approach would require people a lot better and more rounded than people who got lucky capitalizing on a particular market trend.

And the reason I went to VR is because we're going to need a place for people to gain positive feedback from actions they take long before we can change what we care about and strive for.

In between their value being nullified by automation and us changing ourselves, there's a wide gap of time. Many decades at a minimum.

Re: Unsupervised Learning: No. 165

Daniel Miessler — Sat, 02 Mar 2019 00:41:22 -0000

Right, that's what wasn't intuitive to me.

Risk is bad. Risk goes from low to high.

We want low risk.

But they have the lowest numbers associated with the highest risk.

Re: DNS Servers You Should Have Memorized

Daniel Miessler — Wed, 06 Feb 2019 13:36:38 -0000

Um, no.

Re: Bruce Schneier is Wrong to Fear-monger on IoT Security

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 06 Jan 2019 16:56:09 -0000

To the extent that you're advising caution on that, we're in agreement.

To the extent that you're saying this is silly and stupid and dumb to engage in IoT in general, and that all this shit should not be online in the first place, I think you're part of the problem.

Perhaps we're not as far apart as it seems.

Re: The Difference Between Existentialism, Nihilism, and Absurdism

Daniel Miessler — Tue, 01 Jan 2019 17:33:10 -0000

I also don't study advanced alchemists or astrologists.

Unless it's done in the spirit of art, I see no merit in being sophisticated in false beliefs.

Re: The Effect of Google's Late 2018 Algorithm Changes on Multi-Discipline Sites | Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Sun, 30 Dec 2018 01:27:40 -0000

Yeah, and I'm all for bad medical advice being dropped in rankings, as well as other "fake news" kinds of things. Like I said, I like what they're doing with these updates. I just wish it wasn't being caught in the crossfire.

I'm confident my traffic will come back (and then some) within a few months though. It's a hard problem, and it'll take them a while to figure it out.