>So is the disinformation/propaganda problem mostly solved? Take the good with the bad. Those are evilbadwords that are bundled into free speech, tech or not. The only difference is the number of flyers.
Yes, we should continue to impose some restrictions near speech. Like endangering life. Precluding shouts of Fire in a theater.
Anyway, I think the whole point of the discussion is Do you actually want bigtech doing the solving? in the first place.
I'll answer with standard salutations (Hey there, Hello, Howdy, Hiya), since that's all you said to me.
Sometimes I answer genuinely, but in accommodation of our NPCs only when it fits in a one-second, shallow quip. Desirably tripe remarks about being cold or peckish.
The itch I get from "Fine" isn't that it encourages bullshitting each other, but putting up the illusion that everyone's lives are dandy. Many people around you are handling various struggles at this immediate moment, and if you span across say a week/month, everyone is dealing with various sorts of shit. Expressing them is usually pointless, but there is a slight difference between quietly shelving them and actively marginalizing them.
Fight it if you want, but brace for impact. You can't uninvent tech.
On one side of the coin, I get to laugh at the MAFIAAs kicking and screaming against the bias of reality - that data is a contagion, that you can only declare mandates when you have a quantified quarantine, not when it's in the wild.
On the other side, I have a lot of facerec, voicerec, LPR to look forward to. I can fight the panopticons in my limited domains, but not in the same wilds. They are public grounds. I can't control others making observations, notes. Copies.
Everyone here, or at least those with servers, is aware of how many billions of bots blindly bump against your sealed doors. Their tendrils are innumerable, nothing exists on the open internet without being probed and examined by them. By their eyes. A single bot, a few lines of code, scans what a thousand human actors could, without rest.
I'll pull up a parser site when I absolutely have to, but I feel like this is the sort of functionality that could be boiled into a browser mod. Something that asks a parser service where the shortener will try to resolve to, and neatly present the next URL in, say, a hover tooltip.
It could break if the shorteners ever mix things up or nest the bounces, but if the mod is being maintained then they easily have the whack-a-mole advantage.
I didn't find any when I looked, but I hope I'm just incompetent and you guys know some.
You suggest many possible factors at many tiers. A nice visual aid, that the Real Truth is not likely to be "It's exactly as they said" / "Every word is a total fabrication"
Even though simple minds only want to think binary. Good. Bad. Us. Them. True. False.
Consider that this happens without an ounce of guilt at the corporate level.
Consultants, vendors, big contractors. $500 military wrenches. Being invoiced a billable hour because someone left a voicemail.
We also do it to shuffle salaries around. If you're among our more powerful elite (politics, but also industrial, telecom, even entertainment/fashion) you're damn right your little brother has some kind of consulting job title and supposedly inhabits office#701B, in a building that only goes up to 6.
EG: "And the office on our left is where Ajit Pai currently works, for his six-figure salary." "Oh, does he live here in New York?" "Mr. Pai has never been to New York."
It's not something that's supposed occur in the tiny range of a pleb's influence, of course.
That said, it's also a personal issue, as in having an inwards perspective to consider, unaffected by the relative measuring sticks in the world around you. It will likely affect Who You Are, and not just in philosophical navel-gazing zen yoga ways. Filling a portion of your time doing something meaningful for society so that you feel like a human being. It could be as simple as wandering a golf course, collecting balls and giving them to people. Playing music in a park, painting shit on an orphanage wall - there isn't really a standardized measuring stick because, again, it's an internal condition, very susceptible to the nature-nuture build you ended up with.
They're not offering a competitive product. In fact, "exclusivity" means the product in question no longer exists. Even if you disregard the fragmentation, neftlix/streamers have become more finger-grubby, more "inform you of viewing opportunities you may be interested in", more metrics and number-mulling, more watch-as-you're-told and curating. And who can blame them, it's just optimal use of a sea of shallow dullards.
But I won't disregard it. Fragmentation isn't driven by "healthy market competition", this is kids taking their ball and going home. Kids trying to cut themself a bigger slice of a limited consumer pie.
Seriously, that pie isn't infinite. We heap out a trillion hours of viewsumption every year and they pick it clean apart. Everyone wants their pile to be given more. A billion eyeballs live in screens and the attention economy claws for more, big or small.
Oh wait, actual TFS is just eagerly interpreting a relative increase of torrenting in the upstreams. "97% of file-sharing is torrents" is like announcing 97% of typing is being done with fingers. It's not like we, being raised as consumer cattle, do much in the upstream anyway.
It's not my fault that every site, service, and app (entities independent to form factor, browser, or OS) out there has a (arguably rational) motive to track and log every button, icon, and link you even look at. It's also not my fault the planet is riddled with streamers.
Take that bullshit away, and the energy cost of "the internet" as a backbone, an infrastructure, is a less sensational topic.
To be explicit: Don't conflate that other crap as what it takes to keep my internets on. Ironically, a blog is actually outside the bloat I'm lawnyelling about.
Yes, they were also stupid about units of energy, but I'll stick to fights with better odds and prospects.
>vulnerable private property is still private You clicked Agree.
This fight isn't on legal or even moral grounds anymore. And privacy isn't a binary condition - you're up against ten-thousand services and a million databases, hundreds of different forms of hoover/pipe/fingerprint/metric acquisition.
It's like you're bitching about a specific strain of disease. You wash your hands and avoid rotten food as general defenses, not targeted ones. Even those of us with "special tools" aren't immune, we're only reducing our exposure.
This is why people that say "X can still track you" or "Y doesn't work on Z" are dumbasses. You still wash your hands, and you still employ whatever methods are appropriate at your particular user knowledge/armory.
You can't uninvent technology. And the copyright mafiaa's are evidence that you can't legislate it away, even with deep pockets and influence. I'll fight on the social front on principal, but with the assumption of failure, i.e. I'm left to defending myself personally. See also: A future full of LPR, facerec, and more.
To hell with any site, service, or so help me God, a fucking civic office that uses a socnet as their formally sanctioned primary (if not their ONLY) channel of communication and official announcement.
My first reaction to the whole "Linus needs to change!" "Okay I'm gonna go into the mountains and train" was that we're wrong about what the problem (and the solution) is, since we have him doing things he shouldn't be.
In fact, anything that ISN'T technical, isn't directly focused on the craft, can be insulated away from him.
Consider TV shows. What do companies and shadow orgs always do with their scientist character? They're sheltered away, safely, just them and their work. They're not selling the potatoes, they're not at the reception desk, they're not giving presentations about the...
Actually, I think Honey I Shrunk The Kids opened up on this exact subject. Or it was the sequel, whatever.
I am okay with incentivizing creation. Heck, let's pour on more than we do now! Prolekistan is about to lose their only export and we're woefully underprepared. One of the few reliable human domains is Come Up With New Shit.
I am not okay with imaginary property. Are extraterrestrials aware that some monkeys with briefcases in a glass cube called dibs on that shoelace knot? Everywhere in the universe, simultaneously, forever. Even after Joe Brown has ceased brainwave activity he has rights on brainwaves. I couldn't discuss the morals if i wanted to; before that, we have a very weird expectation of sheer technical logistics, preempting anything else.
Assuming I did recognize the ownership as viable, I then have a problem assigning product value on a non-product. We have never seen a free market, but insisting that "GGADAGC starting at 82.0Hz" requires an exchange of goods, intrinsically, is the accepting of a construct in a manner only matched by Christianity. Gander than the diamond cartel, who at least dealt in scarce-ifying a quantified tangible.
All that said, I have no idea how we could accomplish a cash system for creation. It's hard to do without coming up with random ass rules, easily exploited bullshit, ass-eating contrived logic, unsupported conclusion leaps, etc.
- good enough - not tedious - easy to use, simple - physical/digital management
Sure, I'm down with poo-pooing "real" cameras for everyday use. They're superfluous, right? I'm down with regarding smartphone cameras collectively as "adequate for our needs".
Then I trust that means we'll stop fucking circlejerking about them?
To be fair, it's the "journalists" who started it. The same fuckwads who need to fill 800 words after holding it for 30 seconds at an expo, and so regale us with size specs, the glass shell, how thin it is, how it feels to press the fucking side buttons. Or the Gold Monster Cables camera you occasionally use for a blurry food pic or bathroom selfie.
When people come into the shop, they don't stop and say "well, it's not thin enough". They might want to know about the 4000mAh battery, though. And yes, they're interested in buying a screenshield+case right away, negating whatever bevel/ultrathin fetish the expo-ecosystem was frenzying.
I'm beginning to interpret the origin of this bullshit as something that may resemble gaming's preorder phenomenon; an industry's obsession (a financially logical one) with hype, prehype, overhype, all hype, gotta go hype, hypey hyperhype. And eyeball-hungry news joints riding the jetsream.
Competitors would have been more self-interested if they had the power to get away with it. They will now gladly take advantage of the Stockholm beachhead.
They were never offering attractively out of good will. Being attractive is at best a secondary objective, obligated to us consumers plebs only because it correlates to their true one.
New meta. You can't stop it. I can't stop it. Everyone already thinks 5 grams of chocolate is normal. Grab the least shitty choice and try to make peace with the blight.
We pretend to be a modern society, but we hardly have an enlightened population. Most of us are still shallow puppets easily manipulated by our primal urges.
Ask any marketing group. Ask the music industry about their focus on "image". Consider the other fears/desires exploited in political campaigns. Consider the long-standing patterns (and the narrower short-term trends) you can observe in our countless hookup apps, without even being on the other side of the server. Consider that, not long ago, capital punishment was an entertainment industry. Hell yes I want to distinguish my virtue by constructing a villain for me to project against. Doubly so because I'm in a tribal huddle of like-me's. Similar mentality helps drive war, and to a more civil degree, community-based sports.
I agree with you on what should be, but I'll be playing the edgy "everyone is stupid" with respect to the status quo.
I'm partial to the number of puppeteers who have crammed their hand up Hacker's ass and doomed the population to eternal ambiguity. Special thanks go to lobbyists, clickbait, talking heads, etc.
>That people should have the right to yell FIRE! in a theater? They do. Speech is protected.
>even when this creates a panic Endangering human life isn't.
I'll explain The Point like you're five: This means you don't have an example of "special category speech". It happens to be lumped with an incidental offense.
Still too many big words? Consider that the same speech is fine in an empty theater. The problem isn't the speech.
The thing about your blame pedantry is that it's flawed on an important point:
It suggests that one should then address "everyone buying" to correct the scenario.
If there's a new fad hyping up - some kind of weird snuff, probably graphic, say, being done by Li'l Rapgod - and the phenomenon is dribbling into ads or the facetweets or TV air time or t-shirts or school classrooms or whatever......then do you really think the best course of action is to tell every Joe Sixpack, one by one, that "you are into something dumb! your tastes are bad! it is impossible for Rapgod to sell it to us, unless we decide to buy!"
Or is there a more potent node to approach?
The point I've made is unaffected by many nitpicks you might raise: It doesn't matter if it's actually snuff, or yo-yos, or parachute pants. It doesn't matter if it's a rapper or an athlete or politician or "internet celebrity" or whatever a Kardasian is. It's a point about logistics.
A second bullshit I must rebuke. That "you can still use radio to get new music if you want to" doesn't work the same way it did 40 (N = variable for chosen example) years ago.
Consider that particular example honestly. Radio was a desirable and coveted distribution channel. Across 40 years, things changed. This change in COLLECTIVE valuation (i.e. your "if you want to" is given no fucks unless you're the oligarch) reflects in the content that goes through. Now, your previously solid option "that you can still do" has lost viability.
I guess this is all some No Man Is An Island thing or whatever. I'll side with you on a lot of isolationist points, or "how stupid people are", or how resourceful a person can be to defy culture.
But you handwaved. You dismiss. The culture (i.e. vacuous, whimsical fad-following) of others does affect your options, and "people are stupid" isn't a solution.
It reasons that to harvest the wind, you want to get hit by a lot of it intentionally, then translate the force.
If the force goes untranslated, then that intentionally-large input is hard-soaked. Like a large building face. Without a large building foundation for anchor.
So let's assume the blades turn, even if the turbine is offline. The alternative sounds like a bad dumb. On the flip side, newer models seem capable of actively evading extreme wind: >When wind speeds reach a critical level for a turbine, its blades can be twisted, or “feathered,” to reduce the chances of them being caught by the wind.
Slashdot Mirror
>So is the disinformation/propaganda problem mostly solved?
Take the good with the bad. Those are evilbadwords that are bundled into free speech, tech or not. The only difference is the number of flyers.
Yes, we should continue to impose some restrictions near speech. Like endangering life. Precluding shouts of Fire in a theater.
Anyway, I think the whole point of the discussion is Do you actually want bigtech doing the solving? in the first place.
I'll answer with standard salutations (Hey there, Hello, Howdy, Hiya), since that's all you said to me.
Sometimes I answer genuinely, but in accommodation of our NPCs only when it fits in a one-second, shallow quip. Desirably tripe remarks about being cold or peckish.
The itch I get from "Fine" isn't that it encourages bullshitting each other, but putting up the illusion that everyone's lives are dandy. Many people around you are handling various struggles at this immediate moment, and if you span across say a week/month, everyone is dealing with various sorts of shit. Expressing them is usually pointless, but there is a slight difference between quietly shelving them and actively marginalizing them.
>ask the industry
Seems like wasted steps. Just write BUT INNOVATION on a sign and hold it up when necessary.
Fight it if you want, but brace for impact. You can't uninvent tech.
On one side of the coin, I get to laugh at the MAFIAAs kicking and screaming against the bias of reality - that data is a contagion, that you can only declare mandates when you have a quantified quarantine, not when it's in the wild.
On the other side, I have a lot of facerec, voicerec, LPR to look forward to. I can fight the panopticons in my limited domains, but not in the same wilds. They are public grounds. I can't control others making observations, notes. Copies.
Everyone here, or at least those with servers, is aware of how many billions of bots blindly bump against your sealed doors. Their tendrils are innumerable, nothing exists on the open internet without being probed and examined by them. By their eyes. A single bot, a few lines of code, scans what a thousand human actors could, without rest.
A camera lens isn't so different.
I'll pull up a parser site when I absolutely have to, but I feel like this is the sort of functionality that could be boiled into a browser mod. Something that asks a parser service where the shortener will try to resolve to, and neatly present the next URL in, say, a hover tooltip.
It could break if the shorteners ever mix things up or nest the bounces, but if the mod is being maintained then they easily have the whack-a-mole advantage.
I didn't find any when I looked, but I hope I'm just incompetent and you guys know some.
What is this, 2006?
It's not that I mind CN jokes - I think I calibrated this thing wrong and missed Hawking's party. Now I owe John Titor $50.
You suggest many possible factors at many tiers. A nice visual aid, that the Real Truth is not likely to be "It's exactly as they said" / "Every word is a total fabrication"
Even though simple minds only want to think binary. Good. Bad. Us. Them. True. False.
Consider that this happens without an ounce of guilt at the corporate level.
Consultants, vendors, big contractors. $500 military wrenches. Being invoiced a billable hour because someone left a voicemail.
We also do it to shuffle salaries around. If you're among our more powerful elite (politics, but also industrial, telecom, even entertainment/fashion) you're damn right your little brother has some kind of consulting job title and supposedly inhabits office#701B, in a building that only goes up to 6.
EG: "And the office on our left is where Ajit Pai currently works, for his six-figure salary." "Oh, does he live here in New York?" "Mr. Pai has never been to New York."
It's not something that's supposed occur in the tiny range of a pleb's influence, of course.
That said, it's also a personal issue, as in having an inwards perspective to consider, unaffected by the relative measuring sticks in the world around you. It will likely affect Who You Are, and not just in philosophical navel-gazing zen yoga ways. Filling a portion of your time doing something meaningful for society so that you feel like a human being. It could be as simple as wandering a golf course, collecting balls and giving them to people. Playing music in a park, painting shit on an orphanage wall - there isn't really a standardized measuring stick because, again, it's an internal condition, very susceptible to the nature-nuture build you ended up with.
>competitors
How generous.
They're not offering a competitive product. In fact, "exclusivity" means the product in question no longer exists. Even if you disregard the fragmentation, neftlix/streamers have become more finger-grubby, more "inform you of viewing opportunities you may be interested in", more metrics and number-mulling, more watch-as-you're-told and curating. And who can blame them, it's just optimal use of a sea of shallow dullards.
But I won't disregard it. Fragmentation isn't driven by "healthy market competition", this is kids taking their ball and going home. Kids trying to cut themself a bigger slice of a limited consumer pie.
Seriously, that pie isn't infinite. We heap out a trillion hours of viewsumption every year and they pick it clean apart. Everyone wants their pile to be given more. A billion eyeballs live in screens and the attention economy claws for more, big or small.
Oh wait, actual TFS is just eagerly interpreting a relative increase of torrenting in the upstreams. "97% of file-sharing is torrents" is like announcing 97% of typing is being done with fingers. It's not like we, being raised as consumer cattle, do much in the upstream anyway.
I was upset after two words.
It's not my fault that every site, service, and app (entities independent to form factor, browser, or OS) out there has a (arguably rational) motive to track and log every button, icon, and link you even look at. It's also not my fault the planet is riddled with streamers.
Take that bullshit away, and the energy cost of "the internet" as a backbone, an infrastructure, is a less sensational topic.
To be explicit: Don't conflate that other crap as what it takes to keep my internets on. Ironically, a blog is actually outside the bloat I'm lawnyelling about.
Yes, they were also stupid about units of energy, but I'll stick to fights with better odds and prospects.
>vulnerable private property is still private
You clicked Agree.
This fight isn't on legal or even moral grounds anymore. And privacy isn't a binary condition - you're up against ten-thousand services and a million databases, hundreds of different forms of hoover/pipe/fingerprint/metric acquisition.
It's like you're bitching about a specific strain of disease. You wash your hands and avoid rotten food as general defenses, not targeted ones. Even those of us with "special tools" aren't immune, we're only reducing our exposure.
This is why people that say "X can still track you" or "Y doesn't work on Z" are dumbasses. You still wash your hands, and you still employ whatever methods are appropriate at your particular user knowledge/armory.
You can't uninvent technology. And the copyright mafiaa's are evidence that you can't legislate it away, even with deep pockets and influence. I'll fight on the social front on principal, but with the assumption of failure, i.e. I'm left to defending myself personally. See also: A future full of LPR, facerec, and more.
Good luck bitching away those last ones.
>>I don't want to avoid communication with people
You don't need facebook to do that.
To hell with any site, service, or so help me God, a fucking civic office that uses a socnet as their formally sanctioned primary (if not their ONLY) channel of communication and official announcement.
My first reaction to the whole "Linus needs to change!" "Okay I'm gonna go into the mountains and train" was that we're wrong about what the problem (and the solution) is, since we have him doing things he shouldn't be.
In fact, anything that ISN'T technical, isn't directly focused on the craft, can be insulated away from him.
Consider TV shows. What do companies and shadow orgs always do with their scientist character? They're sheltered away, safely, just them and their work. They're not selling the potatoes, they're not at the reception desk, they're not giving presentations about the...
Actually, I think Honey I Shrunk The Kids opened up on this exact subject. Or it was the sequel, whatever.
I am okay with incentivizing creation.
Heck, let's pour on more than we do now! Prolekistan is about to lose their only export and we're woefully underprepared. One of the few reliable human domains is Come Up With New Shit.
I am not okay with imaginary property.
Are extraterrestrials aware that some monkeys with briefcases in a glass cube called dibs on that shoelace knot? Everywhere in the universe, simultaneously, forever. Even after Joe Brown has ceased brainwave activity he has rights on brainwaves. I couldn't discuss the morals if i wanted to; before that, we have a very weird expectation of sheer technical logistics, preempting anything else.
Assuming I did recognize the ownership as viable, I then have a problem assigning product value on a non-product. We have never seen a free market, but insisting that "GGADAGC starting at 82.0Hz" requires an exchange of goods, intrinsically, is the accepting of a construct in a manner only matched by Christianity. Gander than the diamond cartel, who at least dealt in scarce-ifying a quantified tangible.
All that said, I have no idea how we could accomplish a cash system for creation. It's hard to do without coming up with random ass rules, easily exploited bullshit, ass-eating contrived logic, unsupported conclusion leaps, etc.
i.e. what we have right now
- good enough
- not tedious
- easy to use, simple
- physical/digital management
Sure, I'm down with poo-pooing "real" cameras for everyday use. They're superfluous, right? I'm down with regarding smartphone cameras collectively as "adequate for our needs".
Then I trust that means we'll stop fucking circlejerking about them?
To be fair, it's the "journalists" who started it. The same fuckwads who need to fill 800 words after holding it for 30 seconds at an expo, and so regale us with size specs, the glass shell, how thin it is, how it feels to press the fucking side buttons. Or the Gold Monster Cables camera you occasionally use for a blurry food pic or bathroom selfie.
When people come into the shop, they don't stop and say "well, it's not thin enough". They might want to know about the 4000mAh battery, though. And yes, they're interested in buying a screenshield+case right away, negating whatever bevel/ultrathin fetish the expo-ecosystem was frenzying.
I'm beginning to interpret the origin of this bullshit as something that may resemble gaming's preorder phenomenon; an industry's obsession (a financially logical one) with hype, prehype, overhype, all hype, gotta go hype, hypey hyperhype. And eyeball-hungry news joints riding the jetsream.
Not this year, next year, or even the year after.
I also have a 5T and it will be my notchjack holdout until the battery dies.
Might unglue the screen to replace it, too.
It's a lot of work, but because of the exponentially increasing permutation span you're 26^4 = 456,976 times safer.
That's a lot. That many drops of water could fill a soccer field of congress.
Competitors would have been more self-interested if they had the power to get away with it. They will now gladly take advantage of the Stockholm beachhead.
They were never offering attractively out of good will. Being attractive is at best a secondary objective, obligated to us consumers plebs only because it correlates to their true one.
New meta. You can't stop it. I can't stop it. Everyone already thinks 5 grams of chocolate is normal. Grab the least shitty choice and try to make peace with the blight.
We pretend to be a modern society, but we hardly have an enlightened population. Most of us are still shallow puppets easily manipulated by our primal urges.
Ask any marketing group. Ask the music industry about their focus on "image". Consider the other fears/desires exploited in political campaigns. Consider the long-standing patterns (and the narrower short-term trends) you can observe in our countless hookup apps, without even being on the other side of the server. Consider that, not long ago, capital punishment was an entertainment industry. Hell yes I want to distinguish my virtue by constructing a villain for me to project against. Doubly so because I'm in a tribal huddle of like-me's. Similar mentality helps drive war, and to a more civil degree, community-based sports.
I agree with you on what should be, but I'll be playing the edgy "everyone is stupid" with respect to the status quo.
I'm partial to the number of puppeteers who have crammed their hand up Hacker's ass and doomed the population to eternal ambiguity. Special thanks go to lobbyists, clickbait, talking heads, etc.
Coca-Cola Remains Best-Selling Soft Drink With 180 Billion Beverages Last Quarter
This isn't news. Pretending otherwise insults us both.
Even shills are more discrete. This is tour-guide bullshit.
>That people should have the right to yell FIRE! in a theater?
They do. Speech is protected.
>even when this creates a panic
Endangering human life isn't.
I'll explain The Point like you're five: This means you don't have an example of "special category speech". It happens to be lumped with an incidental offense.
Still too many big words? Consider that the same speech is fine in an empty theater. The problem isn't the speech.
Offended? You are welcome to entertain the thought.
Right up until you think it obliges others.
The thing about your blame pedantry is that it's flawed on an important point:
It suggests that one should then address "everyone buying" to correct the scenario.
If there's a new fad hyping up - some kind of weird snuff, probably graphic, say, being done by Li'l Rapgod - and the phenomenon is dribbling into ads or the facetweets or TV air time or t-shirts or school classrooms or whatever... ...then do you really think the best course of action is to tell every Joe Sixpack, one by one, that "you are into something dumb! your tastes are bad! it is impossible for Rapgod to sell it to us, unless we decide to buy!"
Or is there a more potent node to approach?
The point I've made is unaffected by many nitpicks you might raise: It doesn't matter if it's actually snuff, or yo-yos, or parachute pants. It doesn't matter if it's a rapper or an athlete or politician or "internet celebrity" or whatever a Kardasian is. It's a point about logistics.
A second bullshit I must rebuke. That "you can still use radio to get new music if you want to" doesn't work the same way it did 40 (N = variable for chosen example) years ago.
Consider that particular example honestly. Radio was a desirable and coveted distribution channel. Across 40 years, things changed. This change in COLLECTIVE valuation (i.e. your "if you want to" is given no fucks unless you're the oligarch) reflects in the content that goes through. Now, your previously solid option "that you can still do" has lost viability.
I guess this is all some No Man Is An Island thing or whatever. I'll side with you on a lot of isolationist points, or "how stupid people are", or how resourceful a person can be to defy culture.
But you handwaved. You dismiss. The culture (i.e. vacuous, whimsical fad-following) of others does affect your options, and "people are stupid" isn't a solution.
It reasons that to harvest the wind, you want to get hit by a lot of it intentionally, then translate the force.
If the force goes untranslated, then that intentionally-large input is hard-soaked. Like a large building face. Without a large building foundation for anchor.
So let's assume the blades turn, even if the turbine is offline. The alternative sounds like a bad dumb. On the flip side, newer models seem capable of actively evading extreme wind: >When wind speeds reach a critical level for a turbine, its blades can be twisted, or “feathered,” to reduce the chances of them being caught by the wind.
But that may only apply to active units.