I'm excited to see communities of developers working to build things that are meaningful and matter to regular people, which ATProto seems to have more of than some other ecosystems in decent tech land. And where else could you attend an awesome workshop on "Hospicing Social Media?"

It's very helpful to understand energy density to evaluate what a shift to renewables actually entails or what is even possible. Vaclav Smil is a good source or for a less dense version Nate Hagens has podcasts about it.

This is such a misunderstanding of what "community" means through the lens of technology. These tools are not designed to help people have relationships, and the Google vs. Facebook distinction is quite apt in that both are scale-oriented and relationships are in service of the ends of the business. We're using the word "community" to obfuscate the weird way the technology and its owners attempt to mediate relationships.

Fair point. As the author, I was explicitly looking at it in the context of technology or technology companies building communities around them. I was working in developer relations at that time, so building a community of practitioners around our software was a priority for me.

I didn't mean "community" in the general sense, though I have thoughts on how to build that too:

* show up

* be kind

* try to meet people where they are at, but have minimum engagement standards

* follow up and meet regularly

* leverage existing groups and communities (organizations like Rotary or friend groups) where possible

Agreed. We may need to start moving the language a little to capture things more accurately. In terms of technology, community is more akin to 'captive audience'.

"Family" is another favorite for co-opting.

"If you sit through this community presentation, then we will give you 2 nights free at one of our fractional ownership community destinations!"

I love tldraw and am excited to see the many ways the project goes, thanks!

Given that most commenters do not seem to have read the article perhaps the headline could be more explicit about 'MRIs find "abnormalities" but they seem to have no relationship to actual health problems"

I'm excited for a future where the technologist is like the tailor in their community. Scaling software has created a host of 'product traps' and there is no need for that for the vast number of activities people do aided by technology.

Especially protocols that allow us to get out of the services entirely! (local first, peer-to-peer). This is the frontier tech I'm interested in right now, not AI (though they might be eventually compatible).

This argument might have made sense when property rights were assumed to trump all other concerns, but at this point, that isn't logical. We live in a world where "owning" everything has led to complete lack of responsibility for the effects of corporate behaviours serving short-term profit while all living systems are paying the price. At some point we need to introduce more tension between property rights and common welfare if we plan to make it through the next century.

While I have had some good experiences with CC, I do use at least double the tokens and probably more like 5x going through fixes / debugging from its initial efforts. I don't think this is always bad, because it helps me to understand some of the more complicated interactions of existing and new code and improves documentation, but it's irritating when it runs out of usage allotments when it has broken something. There are some small things it never has managed to fix that I have to figure out myself, but again, I learn from that. Mapping out a data structure in advance and creating a plan before immediately coding can also help, but at least in our project, sometimes it just takes an incorrect approach and so I don't just let it go off and do things willy-nilly. I can't at all imaging having an agent free to maintain the code at this point, despite the past 2 weeks' hype cycles.