PumpkinSkink

joined 1 year ago
[–] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Scotland:"what if we selectively tax the poor harder. It'll go great with that lottery system"

[–] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

That wasn't my question. But if you must know, if the choice is between "maintaining the current standard of living" and "stop risking the habitability of the one place known that can support life", I choose the latter. Everytime. And it's crazy to choose the former.

[–] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 119 points 1 week ago (135 children)

So if throwing paint at a entierly replaceable cover for a dusty old painting is too far gone to be acceptable, what action can we take to stop oil production? Like. It needs to stop. To continue producing fossil fuels is a death cult. It needs to stop, like, a decade ago. I ask genuinely, how is this too far, and what is an acceptable response to an existential threat?

[–] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I really wish people would look at it in this lens more. I think this is a big part of why we're see this same issue in many developed countries. Like, yes. Xenophobia and racism is a part of it, but the other, more actionable part of it is that all of our viable political options have turned into technocrats who have used their political and economic expertise to fatten the richest people, and largest, most profitable industries at the expense of the poor for decades. This reality has bred resentment, distrust, and disinterest in politics, especially of political moderates and "status quo" politicians. All major left-wing opposition has been suppressed, or neutered, and as a result the only truly "oppositional" seeming politics come from far right nut jobs and they end up being the release valve for the political frustration. People can only hear "the economy is doing great", while watching their children struggle to afford even a modest standard of living (by the standards we've come to expect) for so long before they become desperate for a significant change.

[–] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

George Bush Jr. has the most impressive ability to sound like the dumbest motherfucker in the room always. He should also be tried as a war criminal.

[–] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

Liberals should be careful with this. Y'all want them to feel like Trump did alright. We can't have him being switched out at the 11th hour for a more competent candidate

[–] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Just to clarify, this "fourth power" rule is reasonable because that is approximately how road damage scales with per axle weight (last I checked it's not an exact integer exponent but it is about 4)

[–] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 54 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (11 children)

"Yeah. I really do want a big salty lugee in my mouth" ~ Oyster Enjoyers

[–] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Still doin better than ol' Raskolnivok. Man's would be lost without Nastasya.

[–] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Are we sure it's cheaper though? I mean it legitimatly might not be. I have some friends who work in tech and they use an AI model for, amongst other things, summarizing information on their internal documentation. They've told me what their company is paying for the license to use this thing, and it's eyewatering. also, uhh last time I checked, the company they got that license from does not turn a profit... so it appears to be too cheap at the moment.

It might really be the case that it isn't cheaper than just paying someone a normal salary to do that work, and it probably isn't cheaper than just jamming the work being done by the AI now back onto preexisting employees (which is what they did before ~2 years ago anyway).

The other thing that makes me feel this might not be unreasonable is that everyone on the team likes the tool, except their manager, who has thrown out the idea to cut it twice now (that I know of).

[–] PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, but because our government views technological dominance as a National Security issue we can be sure that this will come to nothing bc China Bad™.

view more: next ›