Comment Re:Underserved market (Score 1) 37
Underserved market
It'll be a dying market in 20 years. AI doesn't need Christmas gifts.
Maybe geek nostalgia gifts will replace it. Shirts with a pic of a Bash script with "This used to be my job".
Underserved market
It'll be a dying market in 20 years. AI doesn't need Christmas gifts.
Maybe geek nostalgia gifts will replace it. Shirts with a pic of a Bash script with "This used to be my job".
If you don't have a CD drive, then you don't get to rip CDs. You'll have to acquire your files some other way. And/or buy a CD drive.
How can I rip CDs to a phone?
You don't. You rip them to your fileserver at home, and run a subsonic-API server on that. The phone connects to it over a VPN, and a subsonic API player plays it to the car with bluetooth.
seats packed to remind your knees that they are trying to maximize the headcount per square foot(see also, seats in blatantly undesirable positions relative to the screen); dickheads making noise or fucking around on their phones, some asshole who decided to bring a screaming-age child, the works.
I went to a couple movies a few months ago, and I didn't see any of that. My fat American ass had plenty of room in the reclining sear, and the next row of seats was a few feet beneath me and seemingly ten feet away. The theaters have become fucking luxurious.
But it's expensive. And I wonder if that's what's keeping the obnoxious screaming kids away.
And you're totally right about the half hour of ads. That's definitely the worst part, these days.
But the seats and space
It was meddling by both D and R in our economy, both were scared of invisible boogiemen of "something bad might happen".
Fear is a great motivator. Courage is standing in the face of danger understanding the risks might be worse doing nothing than doing something. This is a calculated risk and ought to be rewarded in the marketplace if it is correct.
Conglomerates are neither good nor bad in and of themselves. The good is they offer efficiencies in the marketplace. The bad is they take advantage of those efficiencies and often get "too big to fail" (a lie).
People guessing who have no stake in the market are making bad choices, because of other reasons. Both D and R do this. I call it the "There ought to be a law" reactions. Nobody stops long enough to say "no there shouldn't be".
Screen Culture in particular was spamming YT with fake trailers years before AI really blew up, and labeled them very, very deceptively ("Official Trailer Release", and such). YouTube should have banned them years ago, and the studios should have sued. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
They aren't clones, they are just the optimal shape. The USSR's Buran had similar claims made against it, but it was very different to the Shuttle. No main engines, larger, different mission profile, and much faster turn-around times. It's just that the best shape for a spaceplane is the shape that the Shuttle is, so every other one looks like a "clone" of it.
Yep. Similar to aircraft. There's a reason why planes that perform a specific function at specific performance parameters tend to look alike. Because the parameters demands certain shapes, airflow, capacity, etc, and you end up with planes doing the same mission but designed by different teams yet look alike. See the DC-10/L-1011 airliner situation.
The stable genius jr. has concluded that fusion technology is pointless anyway. Coal and oil are the future! Soon also on Mars.
Oh FFS. Trump is the most pro-nuclear president in four decades, including supporting fusion research and exploring new reactor designs: Trump Bets Big on Nuclear
"United States President Donald Trump is putting his money where his mouth is as he doubles down on efforts to accelerate the expansion of the country’s nuclear energy sector. The government will spend billions in public funding to reinvigorate U.S. nuclear power, following decades of underinvestment. Unlike renewable energy, Trump views nuclear power as key to expanding the U.S. electricity generation capacity and recently announced the target of quadrupling nuclear capacity by 2050.
In May, President Trump signed an executive order calling for the U.S. to develop 10 new large nuclear reactors by the end of the decade. In addition, several tech companies, including Alphabet, Amazon, Meta Platforms, and Microsoft, are providing billions in private funding to restart old nuclear plants, upgrade existing ones, and deploy new reactor technology to meet the growing demands from the data centres powering advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence.
The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DoE) loan office will dedicate significant funds to the nuclear energy industry to support the development of new reactors. This week, the Energy Secretary Chris Wright stated, “We have significant lending authority at the loan programme office By far the biggest use of those dollars will be for nuclear power plants — to get those first plants built.”
Probably a good thing, handling CNN to the Ellisons before midterms would have really bad outcomes
It wouldn't do jack shit, because no one watches CNN. Travelers used to be stuck with their network, as CNN used to pay airports to display their network, but that ended in 2021 as mobile devices took away that information monopoly, and CNN lost that ad revenue. CNN has half the viewers of MS Now, and only a quarter the viewers of Fox. CNN is way past their glory days, and essentially has become an Also Ran. And cable news doesn't have nearly the reach that the traditional US Big 3 news networks does. All the major cable news players combined still make up less viewers than the lowest rated Big 3 player, CBS, with 4+ million viewers. Which, btw, pales in comparison to ABC, with 8+ million viewers, and NBC with 6+ million. The idea that the Ellisons would "take over" American media is laughable on its face, even if they got Warner Bros. They'd still be a distant third in broadcast reach behind Disney and Comcast, hysterical wailing to the contrary.
The worst case scenarios are going to happen. Or worse.
OK. When? Because I've been hearing worst case scenarios all my adult life, and most of them are now past their predicted dates. Beginning with Paul Erlich's infamous predictions of mass-starvation in the 60's and 70's, nearly every year the press is filled with credentialed experts that tell us the end is nigh and that the point of no return is almost here. If you want to know why most of the public is so Meh about these doomsday predictions, it's because we've been inundated with the Boy Crying Wolf all of our lives. Would you like a timeline of all the point of no return predictions over the years? It's readily available.
We all know tipping in the US is mandatory in all but law, it's culturally obligatory which bears little difference to a legal mandate.
Uh, no, it isn't. Post COVID, some companies are trying to guilt trip customers into tipping all employees in every job... I'm looking at you, fancy-pantsy coffee shops like Starbucks, Dutch Brothers, 7-Brew, etc.... but the vast majority of employees do not ask for nor receive tips as part of their jobs in America. And in jobs where I'd like to tip them for extra service.... grocery pickup, for instance... they're generally not allowed to ask for or receive tips.
Tipping is fine for waitressing, because if the service is good they can make considerably more money. But the post-COVID attempt by some companies to normalize tipping in their industries never took off in the US. Americans resented the push and saw it for what it was.
Look, I know "nuclear device" is correctly generic, so that RTGs and things like them, legitimately count. But let's be serious: right around the very same time this real stuff happened, some really great fake stuff happened too: the movie Goldfinger.
And once you've watched Goldfinger, "nuclear device" is just a euphemism for a bomb. So don't go calling RTGs "nuclear devices," please.
it is pretty clear trump would pardon or vacate any fine against a right winger org.
The president does not yet have pardoning power over civil judgements. Maybe a constitutional amendment to do that is coming, but we haven't had a vote on it yet.
Some good has come from promoting more user speech online, but also a lot of bullying, harassment, echo chambers, doxxing, stochastic terrorism, and so on.
You make it sound as dangerous as a 1775 soap box that people like Sam Adams would stand upon and shout from, or a pamphlet-printing-press that someone like Thomas Paine might use, where in both cases the goal was often to rowse the rabble into protest and action.
But is the internet really that dangerous?
"The platforms" are, at best, a percent of the internet.
Sign up for a linode, put up any sort of website you can imagine on it, and explain why you would choose for the algorithms you write or install, to work the way that you fear.
It doesn't have to be as bad as you say, unless you want it. That's essential freedom.
All Finagle Laws may be bypassed by learning the simple art of doing without thinking.