Basically a deer with a human face. Despite probably being some sort of magical nature spirit, his interests are primarily in technology and politics and science fiction.
Spent many years on Reddit and then some time on kbin.social.
To achieve that, we must decommission all existing fossil fuel powered machinery, from power plants, to manufacturing, transportation, and agricultural equipment, and replace them with net zero emission alternatives.
By 2030? Not going to happen, then.
That means we need to come up with a different “right” action in the meantime. We shouldn’t be relying on a dream scenario that has basically no chance of actually coming to pass.
There are people who want AI, crypto, and IoT things. If there weren’t then there’d be no money to be made in selling it.
You’ve made a heck of a lot of assumptions about how a time capsule like this would be set up. But even so, how is being mined for raw materials better than having some of my stuff be misattributed?
There’s rather a big difference between a time capsule and a landfill.
We’d need to take some cues from how the ancients did it. Either arrange for long term security, like the Egyptians, or rely on secrecy, like the Mongols. It won’t work forever, but as long as it works for a couple of generations I’d be satisfied.
One idea that comes to mind for modern grave goods would be to bury them in a nuclear waste disposal facility.
I’m thinking more along the lines of future archaeologists. We learn so much about ancient cultures from what they bury with their dead, I figure we should return the favor.
You should watch the video I linked, it’s only 6 minutes long. The problem is that if you did manage to get more success for a third-party candidate that would be a bad thing. It would mean that the resulting government will be less likely to reflect your positions and ideals than it would if there had been no third-party candidate you supported.
In a first-past-the-post voting system trying to figure out how to make third-party candidates viable is a self-defeating goal. Unless you’re focusing on trying to make third-party candidates who appeal to your opponent’s voting group more viable, that is. Which is why you keep seeing sneaky donations from right-wing PACs to the Green party and such. The Republicans would love to see the Green party become a more prominent and viable option for left-leaning voters. And likewise, a lot of Democrats are cheering for RFK Jr. to be on the ballot because he draws more support from the right than from the left.
Personally, I think we should bring back the custom of grave goods. If there’s some precious heirloom that holds sentimental significance to a person but isn’t otherwise valuable or useful, why not bury it with them?
I’m already thinking about getting some land and making an “indefinite time capsule” for storing a bunch of stuff that I have no use for but that I wouldn’t want to see go off to a landfill for sentimental reasons.
It’s more fundamental than that. First-past-the-post voting systems inevitably turn into two-party rule. It’s built into the foundations of how the American government is voted for.
Those jobs are also being replaced by AI. Modern AIs are trained on synthetic data, which is data that was generated from source material specifically for training purposes by other AIs. AIs reformat, rewrite, and vet the source material more reliably and efficiently than humans.
People can post whatever they want. Communities can be about whatever they want. It just looks pathetic when they post stuff like this as if it was significant news.
AI models don’t actually contain the text they were trained on, except in very rare circumstances when they’ve been overfit on a particular text (this is considered an error in training and much work has been put into coming up with ways to prevent it. It usually happens when a great many identical copies of the same data appears in the training set). An AI model is far too small for it, there’s no way that data can be compressed that much.
Those sadly will also be replaced over time with machines and there is something we will really lose.
Not all of the things we lose will be sad, though. An AI researcher has the potential to be more thorough and less biased when it comes to digging up and interpreting resources.
It’s not a national news story, you’re right
And this is fundamentally my point here. This is a trivial little story that at most warrants a paragraph in a local newspaper somewhere. Big companies have little spills of random stuff all the time. But since this particular company is the current hot target for Internet rage, its clickbait potential is vast and people are eager to dive in to it for their Two Minutes Hate.
If people really want a meaningful story about Tesla’s bad environmental practices or safety procedures or whatever to get angry about, do a little legwork to find some actually meaningful incident or perhaps some kind of study to determine larger scale patterns. The focus on this particular news item should be embarassing for Tesla opponents. Is this really all that it takes? Or all that they can find?
Really. Someone spills a few gallons of nonhazardous cleaning fluid on a street, and this becomes a highly-upvoted article with dozens of comments on a global news community?
Udio. There aren’t yet any locally-runnable music generation tools like it, and even if they were they’d have to be pretty darned good to rival Udio’s quality. I make a lot of use of it for tabletop roleplaying games, but also “just for fun.” It’s only $10 a month.
I never left, I just started using both.
Probably the “final straw” would be shutting down old.Reddit. Unless they do something else unexpectedly awful that I haven’t thought of.
If it’s not communicating anything, what’s the point?
IMO the best feature of democracy is not that it results in better selection of who gets to lead, because it doesn’t really - the vast majority of the electorate is not educated in the sorts of things they’d need to be educated in to make truly good decisions about this. The best feature is that every few years we “throw the bums out” and put a new batch of people in charge.
I used to be kind of ambivalent about term limits, I figured it was kind of suboptimal to have to get rid of a leader who’s doing well at some point. But with the size of the population of most democracies there’s really no constraint on the pool of perfectly adequate candidates to draw on. I’m starting to think that “one and done” might be an even better approach, at least for the highest levels. Make it so that there’s no motivation whatsoever to cling to power. Do the same with congressmen and senators, perhaps. Let them prove their capabilities with a political career in local politics, where it’s less important if someone ends up with some kind of corrupt fiefdom because the higher levels of government can keep them in check.