the most useful takeaways are the current statistics, predictions about ai spreading because of demand are largely unfounded anymore. but even at current hype bubble usage it’s an absurd amount of energy.

if you browse the play store on a web browser you can open app links directly to bypass this. for now.

problem: actual mental help has low availability

solution: ai can stand in where needed

outcome: ai mental health systemically expands while actual therapists remain inaccessible, as insurance refuses to cover them. mental health outcomes systemically worsen across the board.

Hm, that is unexpected. obviously that doesnt include the full manufacturing carbon cost of a rocket but it’s probably close enough anyway.

not even a little, but matrioshka brains are cool

i highly doubt 10 years is even remotely close to breaking even on a rocket launch.

many techbros think this unironically and do hire preferentially asian male employees. google famously got in trouble for this.

homeostasis as a word certainly existed at this time, but in the biological sciences, and means a system which is self regulating. Im sure that would have changed their opinion on the piece somewhat had they found out.

“how old is a country” is almost nonsenscal. Constitutions have dates, countries are continuos fluid things. Ill illustrate with an example: How old is your family? do you go by your oldest relative, your last name, some ancient family tree, or do you go all the way to LUCA? it’s nonsensical.

you have described how contextual authorial intent works, yes

it is objectively true that it’s irresponsible to answer as he did, that doesnt mean he shouldnt have done it from a journalistic perspective, but certainly for anyone without the clear intent of potentially being arrested. Dont talk to cops.

it’s criticized in general as a dark pattern that encourages toxic habits and is anti consumer. it is secondarily a problem because aint nobody got time for that shit.

there are lots of things that pharma companies do which are abusive, but the existence of treatments is rarely one of them. Herbal medicine is cool but inconsistent, relying on inconsistent medicinal dosing will kill people. Other comments point out the question is more “how to do industry” than anything else. And no 99.9% of medicine disappearing will in fact kill people.

This is not something you want to speculate on, the point is that in an anarchist society, biochemical engineers, doctors, researchers, would be figuring out methods to make and produce useful medicine. Dont go all primitivist on it because it’s a complex problem that capitalism leeches from parasitically.

what kinda glowie nonsense is “dont talk to cops” now fascism? dont talk to cops, get a lawyer.

If everyone gave up on a place when futures there look bleak, there wouldnt be a place left in the world worth living in.

warm summer, and bad food prices. the regime expects protests to be historic too.

have you considered for a moment, i know it’s crazy, that two authoritarian states historically gnashing at the bit to go to war might be doing this of their own volition?

that case specifically did not ultimately have broad implications, but similar cases largely affirmed that vendors can refuse clients based on speech they disagree with. however generally these cases have simply danced around the issue. The general implication seems to be you can’t simply discriminate against people based on their identity, but you can refuse to associate with speech content which you disagree with. this isnt set in stone exactly but it seems like this:

You cant refuse to make cakes for black people, but you can refuse to make cakes which say “BLM”, or in the other direction, refuse to make maga cakes, or cakes with swastikas. Can you refuse to cater for say, the rnc? i would imagine so, but it technically isnt addressed that i saw. Can you refuse to cater for a known nazi? Maybe? Probably not technically just by them being a nazi.

It is not a privelege, it is something being deprived from people by an ever increasingly fascist state. You do not fix a problem by copying it, the other user argued for disenfranchisement, for genocide.

Somehow on beehaw, arguing that it’s mass disenfranchisement or mass executions of roughly a third of the united states, over 100 million people, is fine for some reason. injustice now is not solved by injustice tomorrow, and any person who argues for mass genocidal disenfranchisement is, in fact, a fascist.

Removed by mod