Did it work? How do you know that? A consumer of your package sends a int when your package expects a string.

What now?

This is the stupidest use of this stupid meme with this stupid piece of shit that I’ve ever seen

Not defending LMG’s mistakes, but GN’s opinion that you should not ask for comment doesn’t hold water.

GN definitely has an agenda here. He made several comments that made it quite clear he’s resentful of LTT’s success.

While I don’t think anything he reported is false, it’s all wrapped in a narrative that relies on implications. He certainly makes a whole lot of hay about a few small mistakes and heavily implies LTT is in the pockets of their sponsors and a conspiracy theory that LTT is only successful because of some connections and preferred treatment by YouTube.

He’s very much trying to establish a narrative that LMG is wildly corrupt and undeserving of their success. However, a lot of it comes across as sour grapes.

Like 85% of the most recent YC class are “revolutionize x with AI” crap.

Just because people use “for the children” in inappropriate scenarios to further an agenda has nothing to do with this discussion and you know it.

If you make a tool to essentially hide people’s activity online, you KNOW what it’s going to ultimately be used for.

…and you clearly think it’s worth the trade off. So no need to continue

Locks don’t make predators untraceable

Ok,.cool? 70% of those don’t apply to this conversation at all.

Look, it’s clear you’re willing to twist yourself into a pretzel and play whataboutism because you refuse to acknowledge the uncomfortable truth. That’s fine, I get it.

Nearly every aspect of our society relies on the exploitation and suffering of others.

This is empty virtue signalling and false equivalency. Just say it. You think there’s a unknowable volume of real life, actually happening, enablement of the pain, suffering, and death of men, women, and children you’re willing to accept so Google or the government or whatever can’t read your irrelevant and unimportant conversations

There’s literally no way you can back up any of these claims. It’s just what you want to be true.

All I want is for you to admit that you think protecting the “privacy” of people’s mundane text conversations is worth enabling Terrorism, Child Sexual Abuse, Human Trafficking, Organized Crime, etc etc etc

To be clear, I think people should have a basic expectation of privacy. But at what cost? Like we’ve established it’s impossible to have one without the other.

Making it more accessible helps the innocent more than it does the guilty.

Source?

If that’s what you have to tell yourself, fine. But at least be intellectually honest here and admit you’re simply willing to condone child abuse because you think Google or whatever looking at your texts is more egregious

You really can’t have it both ways. It’s morally bankrupt to launch protocols that clearly will be used for abhorrent purposes and simply hand wave it away because you’re uncomfortable with the reality of the situation.

I think we all wish that weren’t the case, but it is.

Saying crap like it wouldn’t be a problem if law enforcement would just “git gud” makes you complicit

Which is fair. If it’s something you use all the time, obviously an app is usually going to be the way to go.

But the reason they want you to install the app is so they can send push notifications and track you more effectively

Whoa. It’s like I’m seeing clearly for the first time in my life. You’ve opened my eyes and I will now immediately stop enjoying things because you, for some reason, feel so weirdly insecure about your own tastes that you felt the need to write, like, 25 paragraphs (that I absolutely did not read) seeking validation from internet strangers.

Really though. What was the goal here?

LGTM!

I actually winced