I wasn't aware just how good the news is on the green energy front until reading this. We still have a tough road in the short/medium term, but we are more or less irreversibly headed in the right direction.
We're dealing with multiple imminent great filters that not only make the ecosystem way less inhabitable but will drastically slow the rate of recovery to where it will sustain diverse life again.
We're already seeing agriculture fail, water supplies dry up, people migrate due to intolerable climate, evacuation of islands due to sea level rise, and so on.
If we succeed in mitigating the crisis and reaching net zero emissions, it'll still be damage control rather than preventing disaster.
A massive population correction is inevitable. Our society, our culture, our way of life will all be radically altered into something unrecognizable. And we may be due for millennia of iron-age life if not a return back to migratory survival.
And that's assuming we survive the next few centuries at all. Our existential risk is no longer insignificant.
I think you are misrepresenting the take. I'm only describing the situation, which, yes, may lead to some people giving up.
I'm skeptical of just doing something even if it's useless, but that's not to say there is nothing to be done.
When it comes to solving the rise of authoritarianism and movements towards autocracy, we don't know what to do. The things we usually do (protest, escalate to violence) either don't affect change, or can wreck society. But that means figuring out what to do, even if it means trying what hasn't been done before.
In the case of the US, ours is a huge society that teams with the chaos of complexity, so we will have plenty of opportunities to sabotage the transnational white power movement's takeover through local action seizing on this vulnerability. Think of the dinosaur clones on Isla Nublar breeding, migrating to the mainland and finding enough lysine to survive, despite all the efforts to keep them in control. (The infighting and brain-drain within the organizations trying to seize power may eventually drive them to collapse as well, but we have to give that time to fester).
In the case of the climate and plastic crises, we are fucked. The global food supply infrastructure will collapse and people are going to die. Few people like to look at those models (so most scientists just say this will be bad if it gets to here), so the few estimates suggest that if we act now to mitigate climate effects and drastically drop greenhouse emissions, we might be able to get the world to continue to sustain one billion people on the long term.
Do note that is seven billion people less than we have, and people who are alive today will get to experience this drop. Famine is going to become the new in thing, and it's the sort of death we don't wish on our worst enemies... unless we're Benjamin Netanyahu.
Sophie From Mars has a long form discussion video The World Is Not Ending where she discusses the range of outcomes, noting that the concentration of wealth and power to people who cannot think rationally about it, except to hoard it, decides whether we figure out better how to organize and cooperate, or exist in a Mad Max future with far fewer cars and more cannibalism.
I don't indulge in opinions, except to say I'm afraid of the cannibal famine future, and I'm afraid we might well kill ourselves, and not in a cool way like AI takeover or robot apocalypse. But I also recognize that we naked apes are not rational and have to be clever even to choose to govern ourselves by logic rather than feelings. We do tragedize any commons we come across, and that's a habit we will have to break. I don't yet know how.
It's not to say we're doomed. Rather it's to say the odds of us coming out of this are really bad, considering the path of least resistance. We better start figuring out how we're going to cleverly emerge from this fine mess.
Cranky enough to demand satisfaction (in the courts if not the dueling field), but no one in the company will think their own ire warrants empathy for those from whom they pirate.
Actually it does. It involves making use of a copy that is not the original. Fair use is about experiencing media for sake of dialog (criticism or parody) or for edification. That means someone is reading the book or watching the movie, or using it for transformative art or science.
AI training should qualify for fair use.
[Thread, post or comment was deleted by the moderator]
on one hand, it's really hard to get the attention of the folks responsible for relief in Gaza / giving massacre weapons to the IDF, and so egging Van Goghs (protected from eggs) and spray-painting Stonehenge (with cornflour) helps when it makes news.
But yes, some people will not consider destruction as a negative. Since Libraries in the US are a public service already in jeopardy from right-wing officials, I would lower it on my potential target list.
I'm also a terrible cynic. I suspect the same apathy and inaction by our policymakers informs the apathy and inaction being taken regarding imminent great filters. As a species, were just not prepared to organize for international humanitarian crises even when they affect nations we like, and certainly won't when they start overwhelming responding forces.
Whenever essential functions (e.g. access) are powered, they're supposed to have manual overrides. I'm pretty sure this is a regulatory requirement even here in the States where we're stupid and regulatory agencies are mostly captured.
So WTF happened, Tesla? Where's the manual override for when the battery fails?
Jetflicks, which charged $9.99 per month for the streaming service, generated millions of dollars in subscription revenue and caused “substantial harm to television program copyright owners,
The ownership class will tremble before a communist revolution!
The service they provide (from a perspective external to obligatory capitalism) is less about making them, but providing a framework by which people engaged in artistic expression and development get paid and permitted to survive.
As the COVID-19 Lockdown furloughs demonstrated to us, art manifests so long as people are fed and need something to do. Healthy humans can't couch-potato for two weeks without fidgeting and whittling wood into bears. And the great resignation that followed showed that enough people were able to make it lucrative (that is, work out marketing and fulfillment enough to make it profitable enough to quit their prior job) that it lowered worker supply that we were able to contest the shit treatment, low pay and toxic work environments that were normal before the epidemic.
It gets worse in other industries like big pharma in which the state provides vast grants for R&D of drugs and treatments, but the company keeps all the proceeds. Contrast the space program, which is why memory foam (the material) is in the public domain, as is a fuckton of electronics and computer technologies.
As per Das Kapital our industrialists always move to capture regulation and seek to eliminate competition, which are the two aspects that can make capitalism work for the public. Then you have what we have today, late stage capitalism which is about tiers of rent, so everything is both shoddy and expensive.
That's how Disney and Warner Brothers (Warner Sister too!) end up owning all the franchises. It's how Sony owns all the music and sues to take down dancing baby videos.
The EU and California have both made in-roads to slowing down the steady takeover of regulatory bodies and the mulching and mass merging of megacorps into monolithic monopolies, but they can't stop it, and both are seeing the bend into precarity that is symptomatic of late stage capitalism.
That said, true post scarcity communism is realistically a pipe dream well beyond a few great filters we've yet to navigate, but we will see small victories, of which piracy -- what is essentially crime against ill-gotten gains -- offers more than a few.
Nope. People will still make content. It'll be on far less of a budget, but that didn't stop the Film School generation of independent films in the 1970s (before which you had to sell your life and soul and beating heart to a studio). In between all the schlock were the occasional arty films we consider classics today.
And then there's government subsidization of art projects, as per the National Endowment of the Arts.
I think the MCU movies, the DC movies, the many studio iterations of Spiderman have shown us what capitalism eventually churns out. Sony actually chose this path content as product the same resort to formula that plagued the music industry in the 1980s (and drove the Hip Hop Independent movement of the next half-century).
We just need to empower artists. Make sure they don't have to moonlight as restaurant wait staff in order to eat and pay rent while they create, and make sure they have access to half-decent (not necessarily high end) hardware with which to do their thing. And yes, as Sturgeon observes, most of it will be schlock, but through sheer quantity of content we'll get more gems than Hollywood is putting out.
If it is art that other people value then that framework already existed
From Wikipedia on Vincent Van Gogh:Van Gogh's work began to attract critical artistic attention in the last year of his life. After his death, Van Gogh's art and life story captured public imagination as an emblem of misunderstood genius
The art we get from pre-made frameworks emerged because people figured out they like art, and then someone capitalized on that. Or in cases of monarchs and governments, they created a fund to allow artists to do their thing instead of waiting tables.
There is a compelling argument that tens of billions of dollars being used productively to research anything would have at least some useful results.
For every $1 spent on the moonshots, we got $14. Feel free to look for other investments, but big science really has proven itself.
Hence why copyright was originally in the 10-20 year range.
Movie star isn't supposed to be a dream job that makes you fabulously rich, but a decent living.
Interestingly, musical artists who work off the web will do exactly that: Tour and make hundreds of thousands instead of millions (in the aughts and 2010s, so pre-inflation), rather than rolling the dice with the record labels.
Capitalist ideologues, for one. I remember in Macroeconomics class that wealth desparity will destroy your economy and then your civilization if you let it get out of hand.
So when (for example) we have eight guys that own more than the poorer half of the world population, that's a bad sign for every economy on the planet, and is going to cause way more problems than merely discontent and social unrest.
I don’t really understand how [The bit on Van Gogh -- that he was only posthumously appreciated in the art sector] follows from what I said.
My following paragraph is about that. Art often happens before the framework made to create it. In fact, when we have set up studio, they're already doing knock-offs, trying to repeat prior successes.
For every $1 spent on the moonshots, we got $14
Do you have a source for that?
This came up during a TED talk on the benefits of investing in big science. On an unrelated research effort, I found the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 which Eisenhower signed during his freak out over Sputnik, and the big grant to Fairchild Superconductor which kicked off the electronics boom in Silicon Valley (~San Jose, California), so the $14 value is certainly plausible.
That's rather dismissive. Also vague. Are you saying that the notion that wealth disparity is bad is just some guy's opinion, or that you're not supposed to be able to get rich being a movie star (or a private equity investor, or a hedge fund manager, or a California gold miner)?
Usually when people are vague and terse, I assume they're losing interest in the conversation. It's okay to walk away.
When it comes to capitalist macroeconomics, as I understand it, wealth disparity is one of the big decay factors the government is supposed to monitor and correct for. Mind you, I learned MacEc in the mid 1980s but even after theory shifted from national economies to globalist economics (the free(-er) trade movement of the 1990s) wealth distribution, and the bow of that graph was supposed to be kept shallow.
There are a lot of ways to restore some balance, such as taxing rich people and investing in welfare programs and social safety nets. In the case of freelance musicians (and freelance investments, which allowed people of lower income classes to invest sooner) these are just paradigm changes that allowed more people to participate, with the expectation that more people would be moderately successful rather than a few people being ostentatiously successful. Fewer Bruce Springsteens, more John Coultons. This wasn't contrived by government though, so it's more of a happy accident.
And yes, Marx in Das Kapital notes that the ownership class invariably captures government and regulation which ends efforts to keep wealth more evenly distributed so we have situations like now (or like the Great Depression, a century ago) where a few people own almost everything and aren't willing to let it go, even though the only thing they can do by hoarding their wealth is accumulate more wealth. And history has continued to bear this out, and to show that a well-regulated capitalist system is only temporary at best, which has driven me to believe we have to figure out something better.
Post-scarcity communism would be ideal, but we haven't yet worked out how to get there from here, and really I'd be happy for anything that doesn't turn into a one-party plutocrat-controlled autocracy held together by fascism and a nationalist war effort.
And sure, economics is a soft science so this is all just someone's opinion, though the someones in this case are multiple smart historical figures who actually thought about it a bit. I'm not an economist, so I rely on experts who are.
PS: This is my attempt to either find common ground, or to lay plain what my position is and where it comes from. I'm not invested in you adopting it, but if you want me to consider a different one, I'll need cause to do so.
Not in the US or the EU. If you make music in the States, then RCA or Sony owns your content, not you, and when they decide they've paid you enough (which is much less than they're getting) then they still own your stuff. Also, if you make an amazing film or TV series ( examples: Inception, Firefly ) and the moguls don't like it, they'll make sure it tanks or at least doesn't get aftermarket support, which is why Inception doesn't have any video games tie-ins, despite being a perfect setting for video games.
Artists are empowered in their ability to produce art. If they have to worry about hunger and shelter, then they make less art, and art narrowly constrained to the whims of their masters. Artists are not empowered by the art they've already made, as that has to be sold to a patron or a marketing institution.
No, we'd get more and better art by feeding and housing everyone (so no one has to earn a living ) and then making all works public domain in the first place.
Intellectual property is a construct, and it's corruption even before it was embedded in the Constitution of the United States has only assured that old art does not get archived.
I think yes, an artist needs to eat, which is why most artists (by far) have to wait tables and drive taxicabs and during all that time on the clock, not make art. The artists not making art far outnumber the artists that get to make art. And a small, minority subset of those are the ones who profit from art or even make a living from their art, a circumstance that is perpetually precarious.
But I also think the public needs a body of culture, and as the Game of Thrones era showed us, culture and profit run at odds. The more expensive art is, the more it's confined to the wealthy, and the less it actually influences culture. Hence we should just feed, clothe and home artists along with everyone else, whether or not they produce good or bad art. And we'll get culture out of it.
You can argue that a world of guaranteed meals and homes is not the world we live in, but then I can argue that piracy (and other renegade action) absolutely is part of the world we live in and will continue to thrive so long as global IP racketeering continues. Thieves and beggars, never shall we die.
The notion of the latter informs the former. The public domain is intellectual property rights of the people. Restricting the public domain takes that away.
Infringement of IP is a crime according to specific states, but if you make art, and I replicate it, it doesn't affect you.
If you write a story and I read it without paying you, it doesn't affect you.
The only reason IP is a thing is because short-term monopolies on media (or inventions or methods) were enshrined by specific states as law, and then spread through trade agreements, and they were expanded on without concern for their original purpose or for the good of the public. In fact, we're seeing fair use rights fade since states aren't willing to enforce them, and platforms like YouTube over censor.
So at this point, in the US, the EU and the eastern market, no IP law would be better than what we have.
So no, you have not demonstrated any reason I should have respect for your IP.
However, if you're going to insist, and be an IP maximalist, there is one thing I can do for you /to you (or Sony, or Time Warner, or Disney) that is worse than pirating your product.
And that, of course, is not pirating your product.
If an asteroid were to hit the Earth large enough to cause human extinction, it would save us the embarrassment of killing ourselves from poisoning the climate or microplastic pollution.
I'm pretty sure we navigated nuclear holocaust, but we haven't fully ruled it out either.
Related to the current election, that OG conservatives, or Reagan and Bush conservatives (referring to George H. W. Bush) are the same thing as MAGA conservatives.
The difference is, the old guard blithely preserved the kind of policies that shredded social safety nets and business regulations in favor of tax cuts, leading to precarity and the rise of paranoia that led to the Trump takeover in 2015.
The OGs just wish they had another mile or two of altitude to plummet, and are freaked out about the ground looming so close and rushing so fast. But they will still keep the same policies, and will still lay a ground of Ayn Randian, Reagan-worshiping Mitt Romney / Jeb Bush / Ted Cruz candidates until some other charismatic narcissist Mussolini-wanabe rushes in and plucks the whole party from their hands again. And they'll get all butt-smoochy with the new guy like Lindsey Graham did with Trump (after predicting how this loose cannon will end the Republican party).
They didn't just buy the ticket to ride. They bought stocks in the railroad line, and insisted that fascism-backed one-party autocracy was the destination. They knew it since Reagan. By George W. Bush it was showing serious signs even before the PATRIOT act.
So when people freak out today because we're on the brink of losing our democracy, I have to wonder where they've been the last two decades. How is it after George W. Bush, and torture and Iraq and the pig lagoons and Abstinence-Only sex ed, did you think another Republican president was a good thing? I know Clinton was scary, but did you take even one look at Trump?
Humans are not descended from contemporary apes rather the apes that were around millions of years ago.
Also, if we attain the not-insignificant-anymore possibility of going extinct in the next couple hundred years (like the dinosaurs from famine complicated by drastic climate change, or from too many microplastics in the brain, or from nuclear escalation, which we haven't entirely ruled out) we will have only survived ~250,000 years compared to Homo-Erectus which survived over 2,000,000. But we will get the self-extermination achievement.
It raises the question what does or doesn't count as an addictive feed. I bet this doesn't specify any particular dark pattern or monetization model.
If we gave half a fuck about mental wellnes regarding mobile use, we would have addressed all this when it was particular to mobile games.
No, this is about our kids learning early how fucked society is, and how their own generation is being fed a pro-ownership-class indoctrination regimen before being appointed a string of dead-end toxic jobs.
Social media is how we learn about the genocide in Gaza, police officer-involved homicide rates, and unionization efforts. and that is why we want kids off social media.
Yes. Elon should approach his advertisers on bended knee -- after changing Twitter back to Twitter, and creating a proper moderation system that filters out neonazis and Russian AI Trump-bots.
Oh, George Washington rode the waves Abe Lincoln wore his hat with praise Thomas Jefferson, the sandy king, and Teddy Roosevelt, the beach-hiking thing Barrack Obama, surfing gracefully Historical presidents at the sea!
-- @hisvault.eth
That's not the point. The point is our industrialist and upper-management managers have tipped their hands. They have demonstrated beyond doubt that they'd totally replace their workforce if they could even when doing so means families or entire neighborhoods go hungry or are driven out of their homes.
And that includes creatives and experts. It even eventually includes, with a nod to The Brain Center at Whipple's, the upper management who aren't principle shareholders. The massive population correction at the end of capitalism is revealed at last.
Your own job is forfeit as soon as it becomes cheaper over a few years to automate your position.
The problem is our upper management are paranoid of time theft (even though its opposite, wage theft, costs the economy more money than all petty crime combined). And out of sheer paranoia, they're going to be susceptible to technological snake oil, especially of the sort that tightens the collars on labor and makes them that much more miserable.
As the Twilight Zone episode shows, this has been a known issue for a while. But we haven't yet seized the means of production even a century since the Great Depression.
I call shenanigans. We've had bullying when I was a kid in the 70s. Has anything been done about it? No. Why? Because dominance hierarchy is in among our school districts and administrators, and they like sports team lettermen over science nerds. This hadn't changed in the aughts. It's still the same, today. Even when kids come in with proof of violence (e.g. phone camera video) the question is why did you have a phone in school? not can we identify the dude curb-stomping kids three times smaller than him?
We had hungry kids in the 70s. Have we done anything about it? No. We try to set up school lunches, but then the programs get cancelled because socialism bad! So kids are going hungry thanks to ideology.
Are we yet teaching sexual consent (or how about consent in other places like work and TOS?) No. We're teaching abstinence-only education in 26 states with comprehensive sex ed mandated in three (the west coast). We're teaching girls they're like chewing gum, that is, one-use, and a sexual assault destroys their value. And we're teaching boys their sexuality isn't welcome until they can afford to put a ring on it and have a salary in place, driving them to become alt-right war boys for Immorten Joe. ( WITNESS ME! )
So how about dealing with kids who are homeless? In poverty? In the abusive foster-care system? Dealing with DV at home? Not a god damn thing. Kids need food, shelter, basic needs like clothing, playtime, time to bond with their family, time to socialize, stability at home. Until they have these things, any energy we spend not arranging to providing these things is failure of society to serve basic child welfare for the public.
Warning labels on social media will not feed hungry kids, or assure their place to sleep is safe and warm, and we have an outrageous number of kids for whom the latter set are the problem, not dangers of social media. Also warning labels that are not congruent with current scientific consensus only weaken the veracity of tobacco product labels.
ETA: That's not the best link. This search leads to a wider array of stories, and TD is pretty good about including sources within each article.
So, let California be a lesson to you: excessive PSA warnings of things that cause health problems (e.g. Known to the state of California to cause cancer ) leads to the public generally ignoring the PSA warnings.
Putting a warning on social media like the warning on tobacco products will weaken the efficacy -- and veracity -- of the labels already on tobacco products.
Well, the California example is about too many PSA warning labels. So many things are known by the State of California to cause cancer that no-one takes heed of the labels anymore. Similarly Nancy Reagan's anti-drug campaign (and Tipper Gore's parental advisory music labels) only encouraged kids to do more drugs and listen to angrier music.
So it's not that kids will smoke more (or much more) it's that the labels will be more easily ignored when the government fails to be sparing in their use.
In an non-government example, when everything is a sin, then nothing is a sin.
It's never the upper managent but they don't actually do anything but landlord. Lower managers are being replaced by bots that police the bottom rung workers.
Anyhow when AI was very not working right at all the ownership class were eager to replace creative workers even then, so we we've known for over a year or two they're gunning to end creative work and replace it with menial work.
I don't know what the Mahsa Amini moment is going to be to spark the general worker uprising, but news about the conditions being right comes in every day.
A thing only exists if I know it exists. I experience good days and bad days but I do the best I can to keep moving forward despite this flaw. I don't have any wisdom to share but I hope y'all have a nice day 😊
Um, to be fair, Descartes mostly agrees with you. (He later tries to finagle god and the rest of the world with some dubious logic, but that's challenged more often than the initial premise and first step.)
We sometimes have to clarify that LGBT+ folk aren't particularly virtuous, just people, and like the rest of the population suffers from its own share of internal bigotry. The lesbian community is no exception.
Lesbians range from really rather bisexual to staunchly misandrist and there are different gatekeeping checkpoints, where some don't count trans women as lesbians to others that don't want to date a woman who's ever been with a man (which makes for a really small dating pool).
But this kind of exclusion is not about who these women date, rather who they allow into their community and are allowed to come to their potlucks and tea parties. Generally communities that are progressive and have experienced external oppression and dehumanization are glad to be welcoming and inclusive. Mostly. And I think this includes the lesbian community.
From my experience. I'll get to how that's tricky.
I've found the lesbian circles I've engaged with have been even more inclusive than the general LGBT+ community. They're actually really good about including bisexuals and trans women that are into women. However, this is partly due to the anthropic principle: Even though I'm enby I still have [M] on my state ID, look like a dude and have male parts, and have been completely forthright about this even in online circles (e.g. r/actuallesbians) where no-one would ever know I was really a cat. But this means that I don't get invites to circles that are more restrictive, since I'd be high on the no-admittance list.
But inclusive lesbians are not super fond of less inclusive ones, especially since human sexuality can change over time. The closet has multiple doors, and when your best friend who invites you to all the get-togethers is a women-only transphobe second-wave feminist (this was a thing), and suddenly you've been taking an interest in a special guy, you're going to keep your bi-curiosity hidden from your friend (or stop being friends). And as per the whole thing of coming out, the point of the LGBT+ community is being able to be who you are, and being accepted and validated.
So when I see a lesbians dating app that is intentionally looking to draw transphobes, it reminds me of those conservative dating apps to hook up men in the white power movement with trad-wife minded women, which is to say it's good they're over there and not trying to date people over here that they're ultimately going to disappoint and hurt.
It's a nightmare scenario for Microsoft. The headlining feature of its new Copilot+ PC initiative, which is supposed to drive millions of PC sales over the next couple of years, is under significant fire for being what many say is a major breach of privacy and security on Windows. That feature in question is Windows Recall, a...
A fire axe works fine when you're in the same room with the AI. The presumption is the AI has figured out how to keep people out of its horcrux rooms when there isn't enough redundancy.
However the trouble with late game AI is it will figure out how to rewrite its own code, including eliminating kill switches.
A simple proof-of-concept example is explained in the Bobiverse: Book one We Are Legion (We Are Bob) ...and also in Neil Stephenson's Snow Crash; though in that case Hiro, a human, manipulates basilisk data without interacting with it directly.
Also as XKCD points out, long before this becomes an issue, we'll have to face human warlords with AI-controlled killer robot armies, and they will control the kill switch or remove it entirely.
This is a good example of how copyright’s continuing obsession with ownership and control of digital material is warping the entire legal system in the EU. What was supposed to be simply a fair way of rewarding creators has resulted in a monstrous system of routine government surveillance carried out on hundreds of millions of...
One can only hope. Copyright has, for a long time been wrongdoing against the public by denying it a robust public domain. We should have free access to ideas less than a century old.
This reveals, nonetheless, even European government is about control, not governance, enforcement of established hierarchy, not civil rights for all.
I guess the conversation I would like to have is, are we ready? Do you think we have had advancements withheld and held back and is the economy more important than the planet? Personally I feel like everything comes back to monetary wealth getting in the way of global happiness. Star Trek really got that right.
When I hear free energy I think of perpetual motion machines and other notions that conflict with basic laws of entropy.
However, we're absolutely interested in clean energy (that is, energy that doesn't muck up our environment) and cheap energy (that is, energy that burns low or sustainable fuel). This is why we're looking to mimic the sun and develop fusion. But fusion is super tricky. It's so tricky we've been about 30 years away from fusion for over half a century. Meanwhile, the movie Chain Reaction didn't feature a literally free energy source, just one so drastically cheaper than what we're using now that it's practically free. It's the way that humans have been in existence for such a short time (in contrast to the cosmos, the earth, life or even some dinosaur species) that we practically don't exist.
Another interesting thing to me, is our capitalist system has always half-assed solutions. For the longest time we used simple fission reactors that are not particularly efficient, elegant or clean, and right now we have a waste mess that is, in some places, a waste crisis. (I remember a LWT segment on the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, why we haven't finished building it, and what the consequences are having failed to do so.)
As I see it, the end game of capitalism is not to have a sustainable society of billions of people, but to have a sustainable society of one person that uses all the resources, and has replaced everyone else with automation (even to the point of curing his own loneliness with drugs or sexbots or whatever). So making production of stuff better, cleaner, more efficient, more sustainable, whatever, is not a priority. Heck, the dude may be happy with training an AI to mimic his own headspace and leaving that as his heir.
There are some really awesome paths towards better power, and while it'll never be free, we can make it really cheap, so that households can afford gigawatts or yottawatts of energy use. But Paul Shannon (Morgan Freeman) is right that established industrialists will put all their resources toward stopping any disrupting technology or movement that might unseat them, even if it would benefit all of humanity, including them. Social power is just that sweet.
Vimms lair is starting to remove many roms that are being requested to be removed by Nintendo etc. soon many original roms, hacks, and translations will be lost forever. Can any of you help make archive torrents of roms from vimms lair and cdromance? They have hacks and translations that dont exist elsewhere and will probably be...
The whole point of IP laws (according to the Constitution of the United States) is to develop a robust public domain. Every registered idea, multiplied by every limited rights extention is a violation of public interest and public rights.
By burying or failing to preserve content, they are in fact stealing from the public, since we won't be able to access it when it is our right.
[the United States Congress shall have power] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
Here in the US, there are no progressive legislative bodies. The Democratic party treats its progressive members as the red-haired stepchildren who have to dine at their own table.
Bill Gates says not to worry about AI's energy draw ( www.theregister.com )
Q: “Are we doomed?” A: “We would be, if not for the amazing developments in renewable energy.” ( powering-the-planet.ghost.io )
I wasn't aware just how good the news is on the green energy front until reading this. We still have a tough road in the short/medium term, but we are more or less irreversibly headed in the right direction.
Meta admits using pirated books to train AI, but won't pay for it ( www.techspot.com )
[Thread, post or comment was deleted by the moderator]
Arizona toddler rescued after getting trapped in a Tesla with a dead battery | The Model Y’s 12-volt battery, which powers things like the doors and windows, died ( www.theverge.com )
Five Men Convicted of Operating Massive, Illegal Streaming Service That Allegedly Had More Content Than Netflix, Hulu, Vudu and Prime Video Combined ( variety.com )
YSK: The Great Race is Better Than Airplane
The title is the post....
NASA finds humanity would totally fumble asteroid defense ( www.theregister.com )
Lemons(?) of Lemmy, what is something that feels so obvious to you that you just get lowkey pissed at the world for not knowing?
New York bans “addictive feeds” for teens ( www.theverge.com )
Elon Musk Begs Advertisers to Return as Twitter's Revenue Plunges ( futurism.com )
GenAI more buzz than biz as tech barely dents jobs ( www.theregister.com )
Child Advocates Back Surgeon General's Call for Tobacco-Like Warnings on Social Media ( www.commondreams.org )
Tobacco-like warning label for social media sought by US surgeon general who asks Congress to act ( apnews.com )
AI took their jobs. Now they get paid to make it sound human ( www.bbc.com )
If you're worried about how AI will affect your job, the world of copywriters may offer a glimpse of the future....
I suffer from this thing called object permanence
A thing only exists if I know it exists. I experience good days and bad days but I do the best I can to keep moving forward despite this flaw. I don't have any wisdom to share but I hope y'all have a nice day 😊
This new dating app will use facial recognition technology to exclude trans women ( www.lgbtqnation.com )
A PR disaster: Microsoft has lost trust with its users, and Windows Recall is the straw that broke the camel's back ( www.windowscentral.com )
It's a nightmare scenario for Microsoft. The headlining feature of its new Copilot+ PC initiative, which is supposed to drive millions of PC sales over the next couple of years, is under significant fire for being what many say is a major breach of privacy and security on Windows. That feature in question is Windows Recall, a...
Adobe Promises That It Hasn’t Gone Full Big Brother ( slate.com )
Outcry from big AI firms over California AI “kill switch” bill ( arstechnica.com )
Top EU Court Says There’s No Right To Online Anonymity, Because Copyright Is More Important ( www.techdirt.com )
This is a good example of how copyright’s continuing obsession with ownership and control of digital material is warping the entire legal system in the EU. What was supposed to be simply a fair way of rewarding creators has resulted in a monstrous system of routine government surveillance carried out on hundreds of millions of...
Morgan Freeman Explains To Keanu Reeves Why We Don't Have Free Energy - Chain Reaction (1996) - YouTube ( youtube.com )
I guess the conversation I would like to have is, are we ready? Do you think we have had advancements withheld and held back and is the economy more important than the planet? Personally I feel like everything comes back to monetary wealth getting in the way of global happiness. Star Trek really got that right.
Vimms Lair is getting removal notices from Nintendo etc. We need someone to help make a rom pack archive can you help? ( slrpnk.net )
Vimms lair is starting to remove many roms that are being requested to be removed by Nintendo etc. soon many original roms, hacks, and translations will be lost forever. Can any of you help make archive torrents of roms from vimms lair and cdromance? They have hacks and translations that dont exist elsewhere and will probably be...