Well, it shouldn’t be carbon neutral… It should used to get carbon out of the atmosphere and into a less damaging substance.
Carbon capture does not replace getting rid of our dependency on burning fossil fuels.
We wouldn’t get back the same amount that we are burning anyway. So this approach is worse, because dumb people think it would save us, without us changing the way we produce energy.
It is worse, because it is a distraction from actually doing something.
Carbon dioxide needs to be captured were there is a lot of carbon dioxide in the air. So especially around cities with lots of car traffic, or around fossil fuel power plants…
So… It would be better to stop car traffic and fossil fuel power plants first, before doing carbon capture. And the purpose of that should be, making the air cleaner. And putting that carbon back into a less environmental damaging state.
It really depends on the purpose. Sometimes you can hide stuff in unexpected places when there isn’t much interest for other people to find it, or if they don’t even know about it’s existence.
Also sometimes it is good enough to just delay the discovery of something for a while, because its value after a certain time diminished completely.
So, I would argue that sometimes security by obscurity can be useful. But I agree that it generally shouldn’t replace proper encryption.
IDK, OSM is much more detailed and up to date.
Testing SPECIAL with games seems boring. They should do a multi layered social deduction game instead, where everyone has different goals, lies to another and nobody really understands what is going on until the end.
So some contestants are actors, and think they know where the show is going, but they are tricked as well.
So like syncthing but you have to pay for it and requires a server. Seems useless…
If you want to sync while not all devices are online, just spend 50$ or something and get a RPI and put syncthing on it.
Recently deepwiki links started popping up in my search results, when I wanted to research some software. They offered so much genenerated ‘documentation’ that it caused so much confusion and irritation to me, I installed an extension just to block this site from my search results.
Why do I ever need to read the ‘architecture’ or whatever from an ancient no longer maintained project. The deepwiki page didn’t mention that it isn’t maintained, but the readme.md in the repo states it clearly at the very top with big letters…
Any suggestion for a browser plugin that blocks AIslop pages from search results? I think we really need some kind of ad block for this, but differently. A well maintained list of pages containing AI slop and then filtering out those pages from search results instead. So that the internet becomes/remains usable and mostly unpoisend by this stuff.
AIslop should never outrank human created content.
I am not someone that cries about the end times much, but… If this issues isn’t addressed effectively and the internet becomes filled with aislop that outrank and thus hide human content… it becomes useless… We might really have to look for a new one…
The internet is for connecting humans through their machines. If it starts to exist without requiring humans, then it can be its own thing and humans have to find something else then.
/rant
Basically, I couldn’t claim capitalism is perfect, but whether replacing the system or not, you need to address the greedy human culture beneath it.
Chicken, egg.
System changes leads to cultural change leads to system change.
You cannot just change the culture, but you can change the system.
No. There are no perfect systems. Every system will require constant vigilance and adaption to work. The point is that the goal of disincentivizing greedy behavior is actually clearly stated and done.
I really don’t think it’s just “economic culture” as you’ve described.
I didn’t say it is just economic culture that is the issue here…
I really don’t think people are accurate about the feeling that “Obtaining and hoarding valuable things” is an act borne out of the laws of our current society.
Also true, but what is? Is your point that it is human nature? I would disagree there, humans have the capacity of acting against greed and selfishness. Question is why they are so often acting greedy and selfish then?
My answer would be two options with both apply to some degree, and there might be more:
Other ideas?
Destinction without difference. Government and economic culture is part of the economic system.
Z should be inverted in the top picture.
But you don’t need to misuse language to assign responsibility.
What? I am interested… How else would you assign the responsibility to people that designed something intentionally bad, if you cannot used language?
“Misuse [of] language” is a concept I cannot even begin to wrap my head around…
Do I loose the warranty if I use language in unintended ways?
It is their responsibility for breaking the system.
You just ‘misused’ language to assign responsibility to people for breaking the system.
Saying the system was always designed for this removes responsibility.
No? Responsibility is not a binary concept. Someone can kill someone else, and would be responsible for that death, and the people around that killer could also share responsibility for not noticeing their unusual behavior. And the system could also be responsible for not giving the killer the support they needed, which drove them to kill someone. And the people that designed or constructed that system could also be responsible for not caring enough about these kinds of deaths to prevent them systemically.
There is a difference is saying “I does what it does” and “what it does is per design”. The latter assigns a responsibility.
In OP Aziraphale gives socienty the responsibility to fix a broken system incrementally and Crowley gives the people in power the fault of intentionally creating a bad system and calls for revolution.
SELinux protects systems from bugs in software. Not against users with full root privileges using their own hardware.
True. But most good stuff isn’t a solution for everyone. It takes real effort to escape vendor-lockin. Bigtech made sure of that.
If something is too simple to set up or requires no set up, or comes from a for-profit company, but doesn’t cost anything, then it always suspicious.
I am just saying that the issue is not with passkey itself, but the individual implementations and that google/twitter/etc. is pushed towards regular users.
Critiquing passkey because vendor-lockin is like critiquing HTML for allowing ads.
True. But I would say that this isn’t an issue intrinsic with passkey. Many people don’t have time/energy or the attitude to think critically about technology and are herded towards Google/X-corp/etc with offers of convenience and because they are often the only offered choice on the web sites. But from the POV of passkey they just act as a password manager.
I use them with bitwarden and a self hosted vaultwarden. If my phone breaks, no issue. If my server breaks, I got local backups… Keys are stored encrypted in a postgres database for which I have access, if I need to restore it. No lock-in issue or risk of loosing access when one or two devices break.
Most people use whatever is the default, even if that default doesn’t perfectly is to their needs/wants.
That applies even to people that changed their search engine form Google to Duckduckgo.
Every decisions takes some energy to think about, and the human brain wants to avoid spending energy as much as possible.
That is why LLMs should be opt-in/by-request instead of opt-out. If people want to occasionally use them, they can decide themselves if spending that additional electricity is worth it.
Search engines and LLMs are different things, one is for finding content written by humans, the other is for getting a plausible answer to a inquiry.