Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Daft Punk Break Up

pitchfork.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 445 posts

Re: Daft Punk Break Up

#431

Post by core-questions »

oarsinsync wrote: post #243
core-questions wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facial recognition is being banned for law enforcement use not because it doesn't work, or is ineffective, or is undesirable, but because it reveals politically uncomfortable truths about who commits crime that existing crime stats were already pointing out in a less visceral way.

That's a pretty damning statement to make. Can you provide some citations to back that view up?

Unfortunately, I have learned that there's no value in doing so, since anyone who has managed to be willfully ignorant of the obvious conclusions here that have been consistent for decades will not be convinced by anything I link to; instead, typically "shoot the messenger" techniques come into place. Anything 'bad' that anyone I link to has ever said will poison the well for any factual claims they make, etc.

It's a shame it has to be like this. There's plenty of valid statistical / demographic information out there that lines up perfectly with everyone's lived experience, but the conclusions drawn from it are not pretty. All I can say is that it is possible to make inferences without making value judgements; we can point at problems without having evil intentions and without suggesting tyrannical interventions.

Re: Daft Punk Break Up

#432

Post by core-questions »

vmception wrote: post #298
orestarod wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without links ready, and not being the OP, I have seen many articles saying that "this ML recognition/analysis system has racial bias because the targets it finds are more {insert trait} than average." It struck me how such an unscientific thing made it to so many articles. It's a symptom of a cause that a specific group has greater representation in something, e.g. crime. You can't call factual observations, racist.…

> You can't call factual observations, racist. You should rather find the root cause and solve it. People already know the root cause, and it is overpolicing and discretionary enforcement of crimes like drug possession. The broken-windows policy has been disproven, despite disproportionately impacting "the specific groups" (black Americans) that now pollute the dataset that ML uses. And even in the concept or drug po…

> People already know the root cause, and it is overpolicing and discretionary enforcement of crimes like drug possession.

No, you've only pushed the root cause back a step by doing this. It's entirely possible to understand that the way we're doing policing is wrong without resorting to an artificial, borderline-creationist mindset on aggregate group behaviour. Religious thinking is not going to help anything here.

> So we already know the dataset is polluted.

The dataset reflects something approaching reality. If anything, it reflects a version of reality that is already attempting to artificially compensate for group differences in order to quell conflict.

If you want to change reality, if you want to see less crime, if you want to see truly fair policing, then admitting to reality is an important first step. You're basically arguing for "juking the stats" in order to find fairness, when in reality such actions won't stop people from getting robbed, murdered, or having lives that offer so few opportunities for advancement that they end up turning to hard drugs to cope. ML is not to solve this problem either way, but it can actively prevent the problem from being solved if it becomes yet another mechanism to paper over the actual situation and instead point the finger for responsibility away from where it belongs: with individuals and their choices.

Re: Daft Punk Break Up

#433

Post by sumedh »

radicaldreamer wrote: post #135
spoonjim wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might be surprised how little of a “disguise” can make you unrecognizable. Shakira took a history class at UCLA and just by not wearing makeup and using her legal name Isabel, nobody recognized her (or if they did, they didn’t say anything). The “Shakira” you see on TV is such an artificial construction that someone seeing her without any of the artifice has no idea it’s “her.”

A lot of it is context as well… you see this in videos of world class violinists busking in the NY subway and everyone just goes along on their way and doesn’t stop for a minute to listen. Celebrities on campus is likely also a much more normal thing at UCLA, USC and in LA in general.

Do average people really know any famous violinists?

Re: Daft Punk Break Up

#434

Post by phepranto »

lelandbatey wrote: post #318
Dirlewanger wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Justice were seen as the heirs to follow in Daft Punk's footsteps after their debut. They kinda lost it after that though, IMO.

I strongly suspect that they just chose a different creative direction, somewhat more ballad-y. But their latest live-esq album "Woman Worldwide" (styled "WWW") from 2018 shows that they still can make incredible dance/disco electronic music of the same caliber and energy as 2007's 'Cross', but they chose to pursue gentler sounds in their studio albums. It makes me suspect that their live shows are much more true to…

I went to a festival in recent years with Justice closing saturday night and can absolutely attest to this.

Re: Daft Punk Break Up

#435

Post by dragonsngoblins »

swimfar wrote: post #388
pfarrell wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This essay [0] from Tim Ferriss really crystalized for me a lot about why fame is a drag. During my college years, one of my dorm mate’s dads was a famous Hollywood producer. He once said to me, “You want everyone to know your name and no one to know your face.” Taking it a step further, we could quote Bill Murray: I always want to say to people who want to be rich and famous: ‘try being rich first.’ See if that does…

I like that Bill Murray quote. But here's a Jim Carrey semi-rebuttal (I read it as mostly talking about the rich part): “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it's not the answer.”

Getting rich would absolutely be the answer to a lot of my current problems. Sure not every problem, but even for those problems it sure would help.

I'd have more control over my time (no need to work a day job I don't feel passionate about). I have issues with making doctors appointments and things because I still feel kind of awkward taking the day off, if I were rich that would also not be a problem because once you have fuck you money you can absolutely take the day off to go to the dentist.

I'd have more of an ability to set my own schedule meaning I could more readily do things like go learn a martial art or participate in hobby groups.

Like sure I don't think it would solve anything but it seems very much like an out of touch ultra rich thing to say. I don't think most people think being rich would make their lives perfect, just a lot fucking better than they are currently.

Re: Daft Punk Break Up

#436

Post by intellix »

Loved Discovery and a couple of tracks that they released once every 7 years. They were basically already retired anyway so it's not really sad when they aren't releasing anything anyway

Re: Daft Punk Break Up

#437

Post by brandrick »

fc373745 wrote: post #64
cognaitiv wrote: post #18

Best Daft Punk show I ever saw was Lollapalooza with LCD Soundsystem opening on the nearby stage. LCD Soundsytem closed with “Daft Punk is Playing..” and Daft Punk emerged in a pyramid and absolutely melted our faces.

2007 alive was my personal favorite set from them. They mashed up quite a bit of their all time tracks into absolute bangers.

It was amazing to see them live. Caught the London show. Here's my video from the night: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLA7L60sCr0 (the shaky blurry videocamera footage ages it).

Re: Daft Punk Break Up

#438

Post by cmbailey »

crispyambulance wrote: post #271
redisman wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a great take from Tim and seems to ring very true. I just don't think people really think about what fame means. It's got huge tradeoffs and its mostly not fun but rather scary and unnerving. Eric Weinstein also seemed to run into this fairly quickly and has now stopped making his podcast because the fame part is mostly toxic.

> Eric Weinstein also seemed to run into this fairly quickly ... No, I don't think so. Any blowback he's gotten is not from "fame" but rather his difficult personality.

I'm so grateful there are people with the courage to stand up and say unpopular things. Weinstein is a human whose outspokenness I've been particularly grateful for.

Re: Daft Punk Break Up

#439

Post by cbozeman »

runamok wrote: post #426
cbozeman wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a good thing he absolutely insists on being sesquipedalian, because it limits his audience. He seems to fancy himself as Tech Faulkner; I'd rather be Tech Hemingway.

Ironic you used that word as I can imagine it limited yours on this comment too. :-)

Oh God, I know, but it really is the perfect fucking word for Eric, whom I do admire, but find to be occasionally frustrating...

If Eric's brother Bret is as naïve about politics as Eric believes, then Eric is as naïve about word choice. Probably more so.

Re: Daft Punk Break Up

#440

Post by avesi »

nolok wrote: post #272
avesi wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of the Ed Banger crew don't appear to be releasing music anymore as far as I'm aware.

Not quite sure why you answer that to my message since the only Ed Banger in my list are Justice (last release in 2019) and sebastiAn (2019 too). The others I listed aren't part of that group.

Not quite sure why you couldn't have just said, great news, Justice and SebastiAn have recent releases. I'm obviously a little behind :)
Post reply on HN