Dig1t

Hopefully Mount McKinley will stay. It was named that in 1896 and held that name until Obama decided to make a political statement.

Do we the people get to elect the people in this new branch of government? What recourse do we have if they stop serving our interests?

This is still a useful first step. Once “flock” becomes eponymous and a toxic political football, it can be applied to all future companies who do the same thing.

The word “Flock” is quickly becoming toxic, in the future we’ll be able to use it as a shorthand for all companies of this type. e.g. if I call something a cleanex everyone knows what I’m talking about regardless of whether Cleanex the company actually made the item being referred to. Similarly we’ll be able to just say “flock camera” and everyone will know what it is regardless of who makes the camera.

Notice how CNN frames this in a pretty favorable way towards Flock. They claim the cameras are only for license plates even though they can and are used for other things. They don’t mention at all the fact that the general public does not like being spied on, or trading away privacy.

They frame it as just needing some tweaks like changing the data retention policy.

At the end of the day I think these media orgs are biased somewhat in favor of mass surveillance.

It will definitely get a lot more biased when the Warner Bros Discovery merger goes through.

>I was concerned that they would fail to modernise into a world that is quite different now than 13 years ago

What do you mean by this? In what way has the world changed that you thought they might fail to capture?

Most right wingers are fine with that. As the recent GTA 6 leak shows, companies that embrace offshoring too eagerly learn the hard way that not all jobs can be sent to the other side of the planet.

It's an obvious thing that anyone can understand, any group of people on the planet would behave the same way. It is natural to oppose becoming a minority, minorities are treated poorly and marginalized, by dint of human nature. The data showing it's happening are undeniable, the only way to defeat the argument is to shut it down by labeling the people who make it as hateful.

This is classic goomba fallacy.

Right wing oligarchs want infinite immigration because they get a larger labor pool and lower wages. Right wing normies want less immigration because they don't want to compete with the entire world for a job and don't want to become a minority in their own country.

Spend some time on X and you can see the two parts of the right wing attack each other over this issue.

These types of allegations are extremely common with basically every type of construction project, especially when contractors know the client has deep pockets. None of this has been adjudicated by a court. Plus this story is written by someone with bluesky link in their bio by a publication that has an obvious bias:

>Elon Musk Just Said Something About AI That’s Literally Incomprehensible >Sure, man.

https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/elon-musk-ai-in...

I don't know, I'm sure you'd say Europe is a far more healthy, educated, engaged and safe place (by typical metrics), but they are not building anything like this and probably never will be able to approach anything close to it. In fact they have technologically stagnated in basically every way and are completely reliant on China and the US for technology.

SpaceX is 85% of all mass to orbit for the entire planet, then it's China, and Europe is <5%.

The next people to set foot on the moon will likely be Americans, and they will be put there by SpaceX rockets.

Starbase, TX

Giga Texas

Giga Nevada

Terrafab

etc

There's plenty of examples of this company building these types of projects and following through.

Why do you think this one would be any different?

Why isn’t Flock mentioned anywhere in this article? It should be first on the list. Frankly it’s the only one I really care about and the one that is the most destructive to liberty.

The gambling stuff is bad for society but the real problem is the Supreme Court ruling which enabled it.

In 1990 in was 20% asian, in 1980 in was 7%. The representation of the show is still realistic for one person's lifetime, in my opinion.

Indeed the creators of the show were full adults in 1980, a time when the USA was still nearly 100% white in most areas.

In 2000 it was 44% Asian. In just 2 decades (less than one generation) it completely flipped.

Demographic replacement in the USA is so fast and extreme that it’s difficult to keep up with it.

A TV writer who started their career in 2000 and visited Cupertino a few times would be forgiven for not understanding that the demographics of that place have been completely rewritten within their lifetime.

Expecting media to keep up with the exact demographics of the USA when the rate of change is so drastic, is a pretty high bar.

I think he’s saying that places like SF and NY have been very soft on crime in the last decade. Things like SF not penalizing theft under $1000, or not investigating car break-ins. The natural reaction to soft on crime policies is a backlash in the opposite direction.

At least that’s how I understood it, maybe that’s not actually what he meant.

Just because we have societal problems does not mean we need to immediately give up all privacy immediately. There are other ways to fix our problems.

These people are not arguing in good faith, Flock and ALPR companies know they are extremely unpopular and are pushing PR really hard right now to try to fix their reputation.

Anyone with half a brain can understand that there’s a difference between an individual citizen with a single camera on their own property and a government global surveillance panopticon.

1. This is in California, not the PNW.

2. There are many other ways to help salmon and their habitat. If the goal is to help them, California’s massive budget could be applied in many more targeted and effective ways to helping the fish.

3. There’s no evidence that this specific piece of regulation will help salmon in any way.

lol does $3 even buy you one small black coffee at Starbucks? I think it’s close to $5 for anything on their menu.

>Itamar Ben-Gvir is an Israeli politician and lawyer who has served as the minister of national security since 2022

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_Ben-Gvir

How is a member of the Israeli government not considered to be a representative of the government of Israel? It's tautologically true that he represents Israel. And yes indeed many of his opinions do represent a huge portion of Israeli public opinion.

Anyone can just go on Reddit and watch videos of Israelis murdering children.

https://archivegenocide.com/

Anyone can just go and read Ben Gvir's tweets saying Lebanese mothers must weep and calling for literal extermination.

>All of Lebanon must burn!

>In the Middle East, you don’t win with measured responses and restraint—you need to go berserk. To obliterate.

https://x.com/itamarbengvir/status/2067865510281170957

Nobody believes that this is Israeli's "will to live".

True true, but also these articles will eventually make their way into training data as well.

This is why having many options for models is so important. If we end up in a world where there’s only 2 AI providers because of “safety”, we will have a deeply dystopian situation where the truth is based on whoever controls or is able to manipulate the AI’s best.

Jensen Huang: "Elon is an extraordinary engineer. He is singular in his understanding of engineering and construction and large systems and marshaling resources."

John Carmack: "Elon is definitely an engineer. He is deeply involved with technical decisions at SpaceX and Tesla. He doesn’t write code or do CAD today, but he is perfectly capable of doing so."

Tom Mueller: "Elon is a super smart guy and he learns from talking to people. He’s so sharp, he just picks it up. He is leading the development of the SpaceX engines, particularly Raptor."

Eric Berger: "Elon is the chief engineer in name and reality."

Andrej Karpathy: "Elon has an incredible ability to reason from first principles. It’s very rare."

Robert Zubrin: "Elon Musk is a brilliant engineer with an extraordinary ability to cut through nonsense. When I met him it was apparent to me that although he had a scientific mind and he understood scientific principles, he did not know anything about rockets. Nothing. That was in 2001, by 2007 he knew everything about rockets – he really knew everything, in detail. You have to put some serious study in to know as much about rockets as he knows now. This doesn't come just from hanging out with people."

Yann LeCun: "He’s a very smart guy and I’m in awe of some of his projects."

Garrett Reisman: "He’s obviously skilled at all different functions, but certainly what really drives him and where his passion really is, is his role as Chief Engineer. That’s the part of the job that really plays to his strengths."

Josh Boehm: "Elon is both the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Technology Officer of SpaceX, so of course he does more than just some very technical work. He is integrally involved in the actual design and engineering of the rocket, and at least touches every other aspect of the business. Elon is an engineer at heart, and that’s where and how he works best."

Kevin Watson: "Elon is brilliant. He’s involved in just about everything. He understands everything. If he asks you a question, you learn very quickly not to go give him a gut reaction. He wants answers that get down to the fundamental laws of physics. One thing he understands really well is the physics of the rockets. He understands that like nobody else. The stuff I have seen him do in his head is crazy. He can get in discussions about flying a satellite and whether we can make the right orbit and deliver Dragon at the same time and solve all these equations in real time. It’s amazing to watch the amount of knowledge he has accumulated over the years."

How does the USD reserve currency impact this?

Billionaires can hold the global reserve currency in a different country/state with lower taxes and less bureaucracy. e.g. Marc Andreessen can move to a different state or country and start incentivizing companies to form in that new jurisdiction. We are seeing this already with many corps relocating from California to Texas.

>lots of free money

What do you mean by free money? Who's getting free money from whom?

How many satellites would it take burning up in the atmosphere to raise the aluminum content of the atmosphere by just 1 part per billion (not million)? Each satellite is 300kg, it would take 57 MILLION satellites. The cost to do that at current prices would be $138 trillion.

Airplane exhaust has a real measurable impact on the atmosphere, curious why people choose to target satellite debris instead of plane exhaust as their topic of environmental concern.

Anyone could sign up for the IPO price. I’m a nobody and I was able to buy some shares at $135 on the opening day. You just had to sign up to participate before opening day.

Isn’t this basically the situation in Europe?

It seems like that just supercharges brain drain by incentivizing all the smartest and richest people to just move away to a place with lower taxes and less bureaucracy.

It's extremely difficult, and as I said it will be easily abused by any government which is looking to manufacture consent among its population.

One person's definition of harm is completely different than another person's.

>The argument that words can harm has also been used to justify institutional efforts to prohibit certain language. In 2022, the Stanford University IT department launched a program entitled the “Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative,” which proposed removing from Stanford's websites a set of words considered to be biased or discriminatory, including “blind review,” “handicap parking,” “OCD,” “victim,” “immigrant,” and “American”

>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188692...

What happens when we get an administration that decides a platform which allows "discriminatory" language should be punished via this new "oversight" mechanism?

Many examples of “liberal” governments being extremely illiberal WRT freedom of expression. More people are locked up in the UK for speech than in many more conservative countries.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/police-make-30-arr...