How many times in U.S. History have the 3rd or 4th options been elected to the office of President? When the answer is zero, how do you count them as options?
You are literally more likely to win the lottery than you are to elect a third party to U.S. President.
plausible: check
testable: TBD
falsifiable: TBD
still, 1 out of 3. not bad!
if you won’t deny a thing to someone it’s pretty hard to sell it to anyone
Relay or decrentralize it maybe.
The thing I read about this earlier said Signal is super against decentralization iirc. Or at least against federation? Are they different?
deleted by creator
Hey, I’m fully on board with your defense of social media, but I think in this case the commenter is just saying “i miss the social media we had before they started calling it ‘social media’”. Even 2004 facebook fits this description, and I’m inclined to agree. I miss social media when it felt more like IRC and craigslist, when facebook was a glorified personal guestbook, etc.
vote for people that will help build the middle class up again
The point of the middle class is to split the working class in terms of income and wealth, so they spend their time antagonizing each other and mostly ignoring how the upper class is stealing everything.
We don’t need a middle class; we need a strong working class.
You want a class that’s got more education? Educate the working class. You want a class that’s got more wealth? Enrich the working class. You want a class that’s got the time and inclination to make informed political decisions? Deliver workday/workweek reform for the working class.
We need to be more efficient with what we make
We need to make stuff with the goal of not having to make any more of it at some point. Currently we have an economy that gives no shits about what is made so long as it sells more this quarter than last.
Either we need a magical wave of enlightenment to change the priorities of those who control the means of production, or we need to change the structure of our economy and its incentives to make “build to last” a winning strategy.
If the Republican party ever becomes irrelevant, Democrats will be stuck waiting to find out what their new opposition party will be. If it winds up being an actual progressive party, I don’t really see what options Democrats would be left with. Either they try to gain support from people leaving the Republican party, or they try to be “progressive enough” without losing corporate support?
If Democrats share that uncertainty about a post-Republican future, and if they think the way most status quo actors seem to, then I imagine they’d prefer the Republican party to hang on as long as possible.
What I think that strategy would look like: Democrats going as fiscally conservative as they can while still remaining left of Republicans. Democrats lamenting their inability to make progressive changes, all the while not investing much more than lip service towards advancing said progressive changes.
So tl;dr he/his team did two things:
On the surface it sounds all good, but I can’t help but notice a future conflict of interest for Zhao should Glaze ever become monetized. If it were to be ruled illegal to train AI on content without permission, tools like Glaze would be essentially anti-theft devices, but while it remains legal to train AI this way, tools like Glaze stand to perhaps become necessary for artists to maintain the pre-AI status quo w/r/t how their work can be used and monetized.
this is a grievance i’ve needed validated for a long time. tysm
it’s such a wild example of feature creep, and yet it’s not quite the wildest example of Star Citizen’s feature creep. When Roberts’ funding exceeded his wildest dreams, he should’ve changed nothing from his original pitch and simply delivered that. For reference:
Original funding goal: $2 million US
Funding by end of Kickstarter campaign: well over $6 million US
If they finished the project with a $4 million surplus, great! They’d have ample budget for post-launch support, and maybe even for some free post-launch content updates to improve goodwill. If that’d gone as planned, the dude’d be sitting on a whole new generation of goodwill.
Oh, and we’d have a game like this:
Pick up jobs as a smuggler, pirate, merchant, bounty hunter, or enlist as a pilot, protecting the borders from outside threats.
A huge universe to explore, trade and adventure in
Wing Commander style single player mode, playable OFFLINE if you want
Actions of the players impact the universe and become part of its history and lore
Fully dynamic economy driven by player actions
If caught alone in an online ambush, send a distress broadcast to your friends and if they’re nearby they can jump in-system to save your bacon.
You wanted proper Newtonian mechanics. You got it! Spaceships adjust their trajectory and orientation just like the real thing.
10X the detail of current AAA games (as measured in polygons)
Range of scale never seen before in a game - ships from 27m to 1km scale, all at same level of detail
Support for Joystick, Gamepad, Mouse, Keyboard, as well as HOTAS, flight chair, rudder petals, and VR
the cardinal rule regarding “in-game purchases” is: Players who spend money purchasing in-game credits will have no advantage over players who spend time!
Instead they immediately pivoted to a pay-for-ships funding model and let the scope grow to seemingly every one of Roberts’ wildest whims
The tech demo is cool. Realization of no-loading-screen transitions from surface -> atmosphere -> orbit -> microgravity -> docking with another ship is wild. Being able to watch your pilot and gunner do a space battle from out the window, while you go walking about the ship is wild. But having it be only a tech demo for this long is so disappointing, and having the focus pivot from singleplayer-with-online to online-with-singleplayer are significant disappointments.
funding timeline: https://starcitizen.fandom.com/wiki/Crowdfunding_campaign
original pitch/campaign: https://web.archive.org/web/20121015042706/http://robertsspaceindustries.com/star-citizen/
corporations can’t seem to ever accept a limit for themselves.
This is the result of competition. When success is measured relative to others, it’s forever a moving target. Under this definition of success, self improvement is equally effective as sabotaging another. And as we can see, it’s not just businesses sabotaging one another. If a business can get away with sabotaging its own consumers, as it can in the case of a monopoly, a cartel, or regulatory capture, it will.
It’s just that, living in that moment, it appears that these companies are so unbelievably large and powerful that they could never be unseated
It’s also that the U.S. has shown repeatedly that it’ll prop up companies with ongoing subsidies, or even bail them out as in the 2008 crisis.
strictly speaking it’s
here’s a gift card so
you can give us that money back againwe can keep your money but give you something for free later.
Though I do feel it’d be obnoxious to actually talk like this when not needed
on the one hand, yes. on the other hand, my generation piloted the spoken use of “lol”, “lmao”, and their myriad variations in pronunciation. this strikes me as merely upholding that proud tradition.
it’s hard to know the extent to which the comment represents the marriage. otoh, if one were to read their comment and leave thinking “sounds like a normal, healthy marriage to me”, that imo would be a premium red flag on the reader.
if xkcd was right about jpeggy porn being niche, i’d bank on terrible AI porn becoming a niche in the future too.
“A revolution without dancing sexual assault is a revolution not worth having.”
deleted by creator