UraniumBlazer

joined 1 year ago
[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 5 points 2 weeks ago

Changes in transaction fees wouldn't be so drastic though. As you can make tens of thousands of corrections per year (compared to a couple in the current system), changes wouldn't affect you so much.

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 23 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

People think that ancient western civilizations were gay friendly. It's a little more complicated than that. You'd have a tough life if you were an adult bottom (unless you/your boyfriend was some king or something).

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 8 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The Gauls genocided by Ceasar would like to have a word with you

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 15 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

I don't believe the current system (by that, I just mean the institutions controlling currency) is what's killing us. The economic policies of different governments are the ones killing us.

I am a strong believer in leftist policies. However, I also believe that we don't have a better system than markets. The presence of markets requires the presence of Keynesian economics if we want to avoid boom-bust cycles.

That being said, do I think Keynesian economics will continue to exist decades in the future? No. One of the biggest flaws of this system is that monetary policies require a lot of time to have an effect on the economy. This huge ping difference understandably introduces many issues.

There are better ways to control the amount of money in circulation (like fluctuating transaction fees) whose effects can be a lot more immediate. However, they require all money to be electronic.

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

No, you're right! This is exactly why adjusting interest rates by the bank issuing a currency affects how much money is in circulation.

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Circumcised?

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Hm, makes sense ig. Basically, what u'r saying is this from what I understood - AI romance/sex bots capable of making a significant drop in birth rates would come before AI bots that bring in labor post scarcity.

While I agree with this, I don't think that the time difference between the two events would be significant enough for the drop in birth rate to be that damaging. Why? Because I'm assuming that development in AI would be that fast. I can't think of many reasons as to why tech that makes it possible to serve as a good enough romantic partner (which is quite a complex task) can't serve as a mental health therapist (with different fine tuning of course), customer service, retail, admin, secretary, etc.

One doesn't need to replace 100% of jobs to cause unemployment related issues in the market. I think the effects of unemployment would be seen first before the effects of potentially dropping birth rates.

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Same. Very likely geoblocked

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 2 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Your conclusion is based upon an assumption that we need more humans to progress as society. If AI develops to the point where it is better as a partner than a human being, it likely means that we have achieved, or are very close to achieving labor post scarcity (the assumption being that an AI capable of achieving this is capable enough to do most/all human work).

When we achieve labor post scarcity, the number of humans has nothing to do with progress. Therefore, falling birthrates won't have any negative effect on progress.

When we achieve labor post scarcity in the medical field, life expectancy would increase, with us achieving biological immortality at a certain point. This means, that death rates also go down.

Considering the above, I thought you were referring to "dating and fucking AI partners" as the end of human progress (presumably because of a lack of any motivation to cause any more development). That's what my reply was talking about.

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee -1 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Spending all time dating AI partners means that we have achieved labor post scarcity. If labor post scarcity isn't achieved, then it means you have to do a job to survive (like now), thus not spending entire time with AI partners.

Achieving labor post scarcity means that scientific progress too would stop being connected with the economic productivity of individuals. Basically, AI scientists. Scientific progress means expansion of humanity through space.

Therefore, your great filter idea doesn't really hold imo.

 

Hey there! So all I'm seeing in this community are news articles concerning Canada. There are no explicit instructions mandating this in the rules section. Therefore, are Canada-related memes and shitposts allowed here?

 

Unmarried couples in a live-in relationship must register it with the government within 30 days of moving in together. The registrar reviews the application and may ask for additional information during an investigation. If approved, the relationship is recorded in a register and a certificate issued. Refusal to register may occur if one partner is married, a minor, or if consent was obtained through coercion or fraud. Partners can end the relationship by notifying the registrar and their partner. Failing to register the relationship or providing false information can result in fines, up to 3 months of imprisonment, or both.

 

TLDR: Watching Not Just Bike and other urbanist YouTube videos alone isn't going to do anything. We actually need to advocate for this in our local communities and city councils to get stuff done.

 

I came across David Sinclair and his research into reverse aging. Especially, I came across this video by Veritasium with Sinclair. Apparently his team has managed to reverse aging in mice in a lab? Has this been peer reviewed?

I personally want to believe Sinclair, but he just.... seems snake oil salesman-ey for some reason. For one, the channels that he seems to come on are the same channels that host manosphere/pseudoscience/conspiracy related guests. Secondly, he talks a lot of shit about his fellow scientists and just seems a little egoistic? I dunno...

Also, the recommendations that he seems to give (like reducing protein intake) to slow aging just seem to be against conventional wisdom? Also, for the drugs that he recommends taking, wouldn't the FDA approve them if they actually worked? I dunno. This isn't how a man of science behaves, right?

Anyway, aside from Sinclair, how far have we gotten in the reverse aging/stopping aging or whatever science? Should we hope to get drugs/treatment to cure this in the next 10/30/50 years?

 

So I’m developing a mobile client using React Native, where I’m utilizing Lemmy’s messaging functionality as well. This makes it extremely crucial to have notification support (including push notifications).

How are you guys dealing with this problem? This is what I think an elegant solution could look like. We would need to achieve two things:

  1. Bring back websockets only for notifications by directly changing lemmy server side code.
  2. Find where the email notification code is at, and simply implement expo notifications there.

Whaddya think?

 

So I'm developing a mobile client using React Native, where I'm utilizing Lemmy's messaging functionality as well. This makes it extremely crucial to have notification support (including push notifications).

How are you guys dealing with this problem? This is what I think an elegant solution could look like. We would need to achieve two things:

  1. Bring back websockets only for notifications by directly changing lemmy server side code.
  2. Find where the email notification code is at, and simply implement expo notifications there.

Whaddya think?

view more: ‹ prev next ›