Even still, some times are better or worse than other times. Dismissing changes is like burying your head in the sand: Sure, you don't see the scary stuff, but you also get eaten with your head in the sand rather than running or fighting.

Yeah yeah yeah. I was taught hate and I rejected it. I still get very angry from time to time, but I do my best to not let the anger devolve into hate. Hate is a personal choice.

I created this quote out of my own experiences; however, I feel certain it has been said many different times in many different ways, I was just unable to see it at the time I heard/read it:

"If you have hate in your heart, you have no room for God"

Since I am not religious, it actually morphs into: "If you have hate in your heart, you have no room for love"

Choose your path.

The Senate and the President are not for citizens to access, only States. Citizens are expected to use the House of Representatives. If your Representative is hard to contact, vote them out (or at least that is the theory).

Huh? I was never aware of being given a choice in that regard. If I had, I would have chosen standards. Why would you blame the consumer for the profit-driven choices executives made? Are you a real person or some paid commenter?

I am pretty sure that an engineer discovered the Cosmic Microwave Background noise. The difference between engineer and scientist is focus. The engineer is not trying to make weird things happen, the scientist is.

Well, back when I was a kid, 'autistic' meant, 'screaming and flapping your arms when somebody turned on the light wrong.'

"Rain Man" was a movie about what was, at the time, considered a high-functioning autistic.

Most of what we would nowadays call 'ASD' was just 'quirky' or 'weird' or 'shy.'

Go find a copy of the 1980s nuclear war film Testament. Watch the scenes with the sons. One son, the youngest, has several scenes with things like 'running the TV, a radio, and a record player at the same time,' 'being told that he can't only eat bananas,' 'wearing ear muffs at the dinner table' and so on.

Nowadays, that's clearly stimming, sensory restrictions and ARFID, and probably ADHD, and he's be labelled 'AuDHD'.

Back then? He was just being a kid.

But nowadays, 'doesn't look people in the eye "enough"' means you're ASD, and 'looks people in the eye *too much"' means you're ASD.

Given that we don't even know what 'Autism' is, we ascribe way too much to it.

Bingo. No-one really thinks this is about "protecting the child-run!" do they?

It's about imposing digital ID on social media. That's it.

Is there another way to get music on my phone that doesn't come from the Apple store?

Tell me that every time I spend half an hour trying to figure out why iTunes won't talk to my phone before I realize I accidentally picked up the charge-only USB-C cable again...

Any MBA who doesn't go all-in on AI at this point stands to lose millions on their stock options for not following the fad.

It doesn't matter whether it's a good idea for the business because the MBA will be gone before the consequences appear.

Is if they confirmed your age by a behavioral maturity test. AI could monitor posts, and if it figures out that someone with an emotional age of 15 or older wouldn't have posted such a thing, you're cut off.

Art and cultural activity is a major sector of the US economy. It adds a staggering 1.17 *trillion* dollars to the US GDP. However that's hard to see because for the most part it's not artists who receive this money.

The actual creative talent this massive edifice is built upon earns about 1.4% of the revenue generated. The rest goes to companies whose role in the system is managing capital and distributing. Of that 1.4% that goes to actual creators, the lion's share goes to a handful of superstars -- movie stars and music stars and the like. This is not as unfair as it sounds, as it reflects the superstar's ability to earn money for the companies they distribute through, but the long tail of struggling individual artists play a crucial role in artistic innovation and creativity. Behind every Elvis there's a Big Mama Thornton, and armies of gospel singers who may have made a record or two but never made a living.

We can't run this giant economic juggernaut off a handful of superstars with AI slop filling in the gaps in demand. But maybe we'll give that a try.

I am legitimately shocked that the US government hasn't declared the enshitification of Windows a National Security issue yet. So much of the economy relies on their shit and it's only getting worse.

Not sure how sending all my stuff to Microsoft is a security feature.

The public (nearly all tech-illiterates, use is not literacy) are easily appealed to by manipulating their emotions which happens to be the purpose of art, secondary even to money laundering.

Artists have easy, low effort jobs and want to keep being paid to churn out kitsch images AI could vomit out at least as effectively at lower cost to the end user. There is nothing left to invent.

Many people cannot compete so they want free money to subsidize their increasingly outdated skills. There is nothing special or admirable about modern "art". That's why art regurgitators want free money to make up for their inability to compete.