I mean, yah, there’s no libs to trigger on right wing sites. And what’s the point of spouting right wing rhetoric if you’re not making someone visibly angry about it?

Also, twitter and Facebook let them all back in, so why go to the shitty knock offs?

I think the easiest solution to this is just not to have all the ”smart” features in the first place.

In regards to reducing emissions, I get that these smart features can increase efficiency, but, does that offset the emissions of manufacturing the additional hardware needed? most people won’t set up things like load shifting, or live in areas where variable priced power just isn’t a thing, so that efficiency is only really realized by a fraction of the units.

Things like heat pump heaters are incredibly efficient systems, even without the smart features. I think we would be better served by focusing on getting these made as efficiently, repairably, and cheaply as possible. And then getting them in to as many hands as possible. Packing them full of smart features will just diminish the longevity of the equipment, increase the cost per unit, and make them less accessible to the average person.

The problem is, this isn’t really up to consumers or even companies, as alluded to in blog post. Investors push for the inclusion of such features because they’re ether convinced it’s what must be done to compete, opens avenues for future subscription fees, or just because they’re invested in the company that makes the parts that enable the features.

It’s a structural issue in how investment and funding is done, and regulation will only do so much to counter the natural tendencies of the business world. We need different ways to get investment in to the production of these kinds of products.

“The Death of Stalin” is perhaps similar to what you’re thinking of, basically about the shenanigans with in the Kremlin fallowing Stalin’s death.

I mean, I guess the term might just be “historical comedy”

This is why we actually need kink at pride, to scare away the companies.

I see a lot of potential for electric aircraft for short haul flights between regional airports, or for distribution of cargo between hubs, but not in any sort of dispersed capacity. Hub to warehouse cargo? Sure! Delivery to doorsteps or air taxi? hell no.

Anything that isn’t flying along a designate air route between already establish large volume facilities is just fundamentally impractical due to the safety issues with aircraft. No amount of new tech will solve how fundamentally dangerous a 4 ton hunk of metal going at 160MPH going anywhere but a designated route away from populated areas is.

Flying cars exist, you just need a pilot license to operate one, that is not something that will go away any time soon, and for good reason.

Everyone driving at 60MPH in 2D is dangerous enough as it is, 160MPH in 3D is way more dangerous. It’s not an issue of technology, it is an issue of the fundamental impracticality of the concept.

News outlets make a fraction of the money they did 3 decades ago, people having previously payed directly for a newspaper. Now they basically have to rely on web page ad revenue and subscriptions which most people won’t sign up for since they can get the news for free somewhere else.

So news outlets understaff to cut costs, leading to more mistakes and less due diligence. journalists get under paid, so independently wealthy people have an easier time taking the positions and pushing personal agendas. And news outlets need outside funding to stay afloat, making them beholden to the interests of those outside interests.

So yah, the quality is worse, objectivity is down, sensationalism is up to drive clicks, and they’re pushing agendas and world views way harder than they used to.

So, AMD has started slapping the AI branding on to some of their products, but they haven’t leaned in to it quite as hard as Nvidia has. They’re still focusing on their core product line up and developing the actual advancements in chip design.

He was sued for miss use of company profits, not for failing to maximize profits.

He took profits and was reinvesting in new plants and cutting car prices, while also ending dividend payments to do so. That was the crux of the case, ending dividend payments despite having money to continue paying them. This case is routinely held up as an example of shareholder primacy but has been dismissed as an example of such by most modern thinkers In the field, in large part because the court also ruled that he had final say on how to proceed with company operation. Increasing worker pay was not the issue, ending dividends to make capital investment was.

Edit: also, I should clarify, he was the majority share holder, and the minority shareholders could thus not replace him with someone willing to pay dividends. He was not being sued for failing to seek profits, he was being sued for holding those profits hostage from other shareholders.

This is a common misconception based on an argument put forward my Milton Friedman. It’s based on legal cases where CEOs were taken to court for knowingly defrauding shareholders for their own personal gain (say, selling all of a companies assets of the company to a different company the ceo owns privately for a single dollar).

Friedman argued that these cases set precedent that meant all CEO were legally obligated to maximize shareholder value and could be held legally accountable for not doing so. Friedman was wrong about this, like many other things he said, as he was not a lawyer, nor a particularly good economist. No CEO has even been successfully sued for “failing to maximize shareholder value” despite some people taking Friedman’s work to heart and trying to do so.

This is definitely realistic and not an over valuation based on AI-hype investor brain rot. Like, they’re a fucking graphics card company. Like, sure graphics cards can do some cool linear algebra, and linear algebra can do some cool things… but I’m sorry, they’re not going to be earning as much as Apple or Microsoft, companies that sell the whole rest of the computer to people and/or the plurality of software that runs on it.

Reminder than most other browsers are based on chromium, and Google can probably break ad blockers on them if they want to.

It’s also a chromium based browser so good chance it will loose any ad blocking ability if google decides to play hardball.

When metrics become targets they cease to be useful metrics.

The website formally known as twitter runs face first in to the results of chasing another tech hype train built on sound technology being applied way too broadly, and operating in unsustainable and dubiously legal ways.

so the NHS is really fucking bad about trans healthcare for a lot of reasons. The process is unusually bureaucratic even for the NHS and hyper gate kept, like they will just deny care based on single answers to weird questions. Without a really good doctor who is willing to go to bat for you and stick it out and who understands this very specific process in the NHS, you probably will never actually be able to get care.

Partially this is due to NHS being underfunded and partially because people in positions of power have worked to make trans healthcare as difficult as possible to get in England.

The most space efficient parking space is one outside the urban center at a bus stop or train station. Having parking inside urban areas just creates more traffic by making it possible for more personal cars to enter the city. The issue of parking and traffic in cities can only be solved by a paradigm shift away from trying to accommodate cars in dense urban environments.

the problem with flying cars is that most people can barely be trusted to operate a 60MPH vehicle in 2 dimensions, 100MPH vehicles in 3 dimensions is a recipe for a disaster. Pilots licenses are difficult to get for a very good reason.

We should be trying to get large personal vehicles out of cities and towns as much as practical, not introducing new types that are even more dangerous.

People who make the information fed in to the automatic plagiarism machine suing the automatic plagiarism machine company.

Wild to me how far this has gotten before some institutional actors realized that this “amazing new technology” is only financially viable if they don’t have to pay a fair price for the training data.

new money enters the economy from government loans to banks, banks then lend that money on to consumers and businesses. The interest rate charge is effectively the price, by raising the price they’re hoping to decrease the amount of new money entering the economy, which is thought by many to be the main cause of inflation.

Normally new loans/investment creates growth in the economy, so there are more goods and services for that money to be spent on, so prices don’t go up, or at least go up more slowly than new money is entering the economy. But lately, despite new money entering the economy, supply for goods and services has not grown quickly enough (or even shrunk), so more money is competing for the fixed amount of stuff, so prices have gone up (inflation). They only really have one tool they’re willing to use to address the issue, how “expensive”(interest rates) new loans are.