Seems like a real can / should problem to me.

Hard to believe this would entice anyone to purchase where a sexy lady couldn’t.

So, ah … yeah.

Governments can literally just spend money into existence.

I had to look it up because I didn’t remember. Aparently “the hot chick” from 2002:

https://youtu.be/BWMfj_wZ9Ec

SNL might have been first but not being from the US I’ve never watched that.

To extrapolate…

Phones are many and varied and while a manufacturer might assist google to ensure android is compatible they sure as shit aint helping any linux OS.

There is no gargantuan megacorporation funding linux OS development, and there is practically no revenue for the few small companies that do. This means the existing implementations are, not very well polished.

Because the UX is so terrible it’s just a non-starter for non-enthusiasts.

Because there are no users there are no app developers.

Sorry, I didn’t mean to be an ass. It’s a dumb movie quote. I hope you get some proper answers fam.

You could put your weed in there.

They’re in a growth stage.

I don’t agree with them, but venture capitalists believe they are inventing a god, and that the first to achieve it will enjoy never before seen power, control, and ultimately wealth.

This is a really odd take.

you’re 401k is being invested while the market is down

Sure but you just lost half your 401k, including half of what was invested while the market was overpriced.

When unemployment is high, […] That results in lower rates for consumer loans. So people that have stable jobs […] can take out loans

Yes, but lenders also tighten their criteria during these times because even a stable job is dramatically less stable during a recession or depression. It’s very difficult to borrow money in an economic downturn.

When the market recovers, you’ve had years of experience

Sure but if the market didn’t collapse you would still have those years of experience. During a collapse fewer people will have consistent employment.

It’s a grind but at least they didn’t end up drug addicts and alcoholics like so many others

Not sure where you were going with this part.

The universal economic truth is, in times of economic uncertainty the working class does the heavy lifting.

Yes but my point is, a brick layer isn’t the best person to ask about the future of housing.

I feel like someone working at the pointy end of R&D in AI isn’t necessarily well placed to predict the future of AI.

Is that because they’re so focussed on growth and advancement though?

Right now there’s no incentive for efficiency. The focus is using venture capital to grab market share by implementing new products.

If suddenly everyone realised that the new iterations are more costly without any new functionality, the focus would switch and it might be worthwhile.

Right now, you can buy a $500 GPU, and run an LLM locally that can help you draft documents or code or transcribe audio. If that were scaled up to a subscription service surely it could be reasonably priced, yet profitable.

Can you elaborate on managing “steady good work”?

I didn’t realise that’s what reactOS was. I thought it was associated with react the js lib.

That really is impressive.

That said, I feel like binary compatibility isn’t as relevant as it was 30 years ago. Linux has everything I need.

Yes, you absolutely will be effected.

In a general way, the plebs always do the heavy lifting - a universal truth since the dawn of time.

More specifically, your pension / 401k will lose a heap of money.

As the economy contracts there will be lay offs.

That means loan defaults, et cetera.

Dude. You seem incapable of understanding the point I was trying to make.

What ?

I didn’t “discard” it, it’s just not a pertinent inclusion. I also didn’t mention geothermal power, or wheelbarrows.

It doesn’t matter what type of power is plugged into data centres. Turning them off would reduce coal power consumption.

Is a hidden feature still a feature?

I’ve been using this daily for many years. It’s behind a CLI flag, is that hidden ?

I’ll begrudgingly concede that this is a good point.

Part of me wants to say “just force these assholes to build renewables without the datacentres” but I know that’s nonsensical.

I guess this is how carbon credit schemes are intended to work, but I’m aware that aside from a few specific cases carbon trading has just been a way to obfuscate carbon emissions.

Thanks for that diatribe.

I may not know anything about this company, but apparently I know a whole lot more about the law, company’s, and how the world works than you do.

Quite obviously, you can’t force a company to do what they ought to do.

You also can’t just write a law to say proprietors can not kill their own livestock.

Anyhow, I’ll look forward to being wrong about this.