quantified

Brand new problem, not part of prior partisan or religious divisions.

Maybe other environmental issues will become non-partisan.

Which one? There are third rails aplenty when dealing with Israel. The "secret cabal running everything" runs into how obvious the political and technical-military influences are.

Probably cuts back on some of the epic waste on the consumer side. Hope that ripples to cutting down waste throughout the system. Paying for stuff that isn't consumed is by definition waste.

And, let's face it: keys give good feedback. If you fumble getting in and fumble starting, you are too drunk to drive. The right friction is good.

They want to surveil widely though. Witness Ring and Amazon. Little Brothers more than Big Brother.

Beware the Ellisons, they're on record for Big Brother.

IF valid, there could be evolutionary advantage to those capable of calm and rational action in these conditions and, if they formed enough of a tribe, they could flourish.

Nothing to do with copyright, I bet. There is no SLA in transmitting info.

I think the problem started in Trump I when people accepted tweets as formal public statements rather than requiring a government channel.

What, like get off our comfortable asses and march on Washington? I mean, when we decry the action level of January 6 it makes it hard to justify actually doing anything.

Wouldn't this be explained by customer convenience factor? You pay more for the convenience of a direct flight. You'd really see the difference if there were 2-stop options for that itinerary.

As a business plan, the "Uber for _" approach you describe does work sometimes to make money, distasteful as it seems. The Ur-Uber used it very successfully.

I feel a sense of "so what" on this. No one should bet more than fun money on anything as silly as what's in a speech. After all, it's not random or spontaneous at all. By now, just like every attorney knows not to use Grok to write a brief for the court, everyone who thinks about betting should know not to bet on anything which can be manipulated.

I'm surprised it's just the teleprompter company. I'd expect everyone involved in composing, reviewing or editing it to get in on this. Perhaps even ensuring that certain words they've bet on make it in.

I am glad that anyone is still looking into or complaining about amounts less than $500MM. Still, it's the usual suspects, won't make a difference, can't get blood back from a tick.

If you have animals you are up with the sun, nothing about when you want to work.

Why not just make standard time permanent?

This happened on iPhone, paid-for music gone. Expect companies to shit on you as they grow, Apple and Microsoft are two of the biggest.

Adam Smith would hate a lot more than Musk's capitalism. He had morals, and would hate the private-equity asset strippers at very least.

Informix. Michael Stonebraker, to his credit, learned a lot along the way and revised his thinking about database technology and capability after believing that a single engine could be good at everything.

Not very hilly? Or are they all e-bikes?

People have happily made their worlds more expensive for "points". In what cases are these points actually more valuable than the 1% more the consumer pays for them? Or is just the case that card users are pitted against cash and cash users are the losers?

> Gen Zers are young, currently ages 14 to 29, with plenty of time to figure out the rest of their lives.

14-year-okds are forgoing marriage? Not sure that's even noteworthy.

Which means that high-terpene cannabis can be worthwhile to get high from. Not that you necessarily want to be high all the time, but once in a while.

"The Turing Option" by Harry Harrison and Marvin Minsky.

Sure, but it has to be at least noticeably less expensive per acre per year than chemicals. That gets you more organic food, but you need to replenish the soil and grow slower crops to get better nutrition. Our crops today in the USA have less nutritional value per calorie than those of 50 years ago due to selection of faster-growing/faster maturing varieties, and soil quality is yes a function of various -icides as well as other things, so somewhat more organic is better than not. I'm primarily observing that human behavior and competition is in the way of gains.

> In other words, with log utility it is optimal to take a 1 in 3 chance of ending human existence in exchange for a 2/3 chance of dramatically raising living standards by a factor of 55.

With no evidence that living standards raise by much if any. "Abundance" is macro hand-waving. Existence of AI is not in isolation from all other factors on earth as well. AI will not increase the quantity of enjoyable housing, will not lower the costs of energy, will slightly temporarily increase calorie productivity of agriculture but not nutritional productivity and will not replenish soil, will not improve environmental degradation of soil, air, water, and so on. We'll drown in more plastic than ever. People might do things to improve abundance but probably won't any more than they do today, for usual reasons of convenience and profit.

And yet humans reporting credulously on falsehoods is simply considered background noise. "Eating the dogs and cats", "we have a deal with Iran" actually causing markets to behave like it's true.

And amplified by the concerns in the post. Many people against them who aren't neighbors wouldn't get as exercised about the centers if they were other, familiar noxious entities. Oil refineries are a necessary evil in our current economy, for example. The AI stuff is an unnecessary evil, the majority of what it helps with is relatively trivial and the costs have been real already. The only way we get abundance from it is by losing enough population that there is more water, energy, arable land, minerals, housing, and other resources for the remaining humans.

A classic positioning of good/evil in action vs adherence to particular rituals and belief systems.

From the title, I was hoping for an LLM-based analysis of chronological flaws, internal contradictions, historical inaccuracies, moral cherry-picking, etc such as is easily accessed on Youtube from very educated humans. Not a critique of it, just a potential connotation of the title.

Downvoted, but because there is no "profit" to the consumer. We get cheap clothes of which some stand up well over time considering the cost.

Science is science. If drilling is how you find oil from non-biological causes, drill away, if you can get your project funded.

I'd be a bit sad that we can plausibly convert nearly all atmospheric oxygen to CO2 given limitless carbon fuel and another couple centuries.

We underestimate how valuable and useful the "technology" of a human really is.

Titillating, and cringey, and par for the course. But the concerns run more like this:

> An investigation by NOTUS found that the app incorporated widgets created by a Russia-based company called Elfsight, which exposed the personal information of White House officials. Elfsight did not respond to a request for comment. At the time of this reporting, the White House said Elfsight had been made aware of this vulnerability.