Another important facet to that scam that isn’t been discussed too much: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1809859768388854139.html

I think you misunderstand that I’m talking exclusively about electoralism. It can be a useful tool, but it’s largely a scam.

I fully understand your concerns. But this is the reality and I know it sucks.

Can you please not just roll over and die. I’m begging for you to put up an ounce of resistance now before you need to put up a gallon later.

“THERE IS NO THIRD OPTION” because you accept the options that you are given and try to convince others that they are acceptable options. They are not, stop deluding yourself.

People are “just going to fold over” because you keep telling them to! Stop doing the fascist’s work, there are always other options but the fewer people who understand that means that more force per person is required to apply the needed pressure to make those options a reality.

You’re arguing from the premise that fascism is the only option and anything else is “fantasy”. Is that what you really believe?

I was promised riots and unrest when Roe V Wade was overturned and there was crickets instead. What are you going to do in November after the democrats get Trump elected? Do before to prevent that current inevitability?

What would you rather have?

A non-fascist option. Abortion access, housing, not the world’s highest incarceration rate (which Jim Crow Joe is directly, but not solely, responsible for.) etc.

You’re arguing from a false premise.

Now look at labor participation rate.

You mean far-right groups like Israeli officials = Zionists = genocidal terrorists?

Except that’s not even how most bus systems work because most of them are majority funded by taxes with fares originally meant to serve as a stopgap but then slowly converted into a profit engine (usually after privitization). Fares are a way to gatekeep a service which your taxes already pay for, which I would argue, is by itself a form of theft.

As an example check out the latest MTA report only 26% of funding comes from fares, and that ones a bit in the higher end from what I’ve seen (NYC public transit, picked as the example a it’s recently been in the news for issues with fare evasion)

All that aside, it’s also worth noting that fare increases are extremely unpopular and it’s not that easy to increase them without potential serious backlash (ie the mass protests in Chile a few years back that were in part set off by the fare hikes.)

You could’ve made an argument that the “fuck” part of “fascist fuck” was name calling and uncalled for… But your doubling down on the “fascist” part isn’t “be(e)-ing nice”, it is using a bully pulpit to push your own views and opinions.

The numbers presented are funny.

Global carbon dioxide emissions hit an all-time high of 36 billion metric tons last year.

Discussing Occidental’s plants:

Powered by solar energy, and have the potential to capture and sequester 500,000 metric tons (0.0000005 billion metric tons) of carbon dioxide per year.

Which then they say they plan on building more of said plants:

Occidental said it planned to build 100 facilities, each capable of capturing 1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide a year

The annual amount captured magically doubles bringing it up to 0.000001 billion metric tons per plant and 0.0001 billion metric tons total annually.

It really seems like we should listen to the Vicki Hollub, Occidental’s chief executive, when they state the real purpose of direct air capture which could:

“preserve our industry. This gives our industry a license to continue to operate for the 60, 70, 80 years that I think it’s going to be very much needed.”

This is ignoring their main usage of that 0.0001 billion metric tons is for oil extraction thus increasing the 36 billion metric tons.

In other words shame on the NYT for burying the lead and being deceptive with their numbers.

(@facedeer, I’d be curious to get your take on this article)

Less than you would expect, this looks like it’s a good, balanced synopsis if you’re interested however you’re not wrong about it being a problem, and pointing out the PR/gaslighting that surrounds the issue.

Also it’s worth noting that SpaceX is using LOX-Kerosone because it’s “cheaper” than options which pollute much less (namely LH2-LOX) because the cost of the kerosene is “externalized” and you are correct that something like appropriate taxing could start to fix that issue and force them to make better decisions…

From an article about a recent lawsuit

The App Store appeared to harvest information about every single thing you did in real time, including what you tapped on, which apps you search for, what ads you saw, and how long you looked at a given app and how you found it. The app sent details about you and your device as well, including ID numbers, what kind of phone you’re using, your screen resolution, your keyboard languages, how you’re connected to the internet—notably, the kind of information commonly used for device fingerprinting.

Notably, knowing keyboard language and monitoring tap locations allows for reconstruction of text the user types (as detailed in this article

I do think you are correct that Apple probably isn’t actively keylogging every iOS device (just because there’s easier ways with less legal concerns that ultimately get the same outcomes), but it’s not like there’s “no evidence”.

Ah yes, don’t be realistic the solution is “thoughts and prayers”.

Or you could get mad about it and go do something to improve the world…

This is a classic case of “tech journalism”… If you follow the sources the source of the data and it’s methodology uses the CBECI which the latest update lists a range of 75-384 TWh. (Note that the “2%” listed in the parent article is the global power consumption of the Bitcoin network compared to the US electrical network, aka a bad faith comparison). It explicitly states:

The upper-bound estimate corresponds to the absolute maximum power demand of the Bitcoin network. While useful for providing a quantifiable maximum, it is a purely hypothetical value that is non-viable for various reasons…

Which of course is the estimate that the journalists use for this peice.

There’s also a bunch of likely issues within the methodology as it’s estimate is largely based on the number of ASICs produced; the assumption that “mining nodes (‘miners’) are rational economic agents that only use profitable hardware.” and that any amount profit is sufficient to keep a mining operation ongoing; and many others. It actually does a pretty good job of disclosing a lot of the methodology flaws within the link above.

My goal is just to call out bad/lazy journalism and what I assume is oil/gas distractionary tactics. Electricity is ~38% of US energy consumption and even that maximum bound of 2% when comparing it to the global Bitcoin network is practically negligible when contextualized.

If you build a base on/near a bunch of ore nodes and dedicate it entirely to mining your pals will mine it for you and it respawns daily (passive ore generation ftw!!!)

Another factor was the PPP and other “totally not bailouts” that were part of the COVID relief spending.

Of the roughly $800 billion dollars from PPP which was provided as uncollateralized, low-interest loans 66-77% went directly to companies and ~92% of those loans were completely forgiven.. In other words an ~5-600M bailout predicated on keeping positions open long enough to maintain plausible deniability that is what the goal was.

Depends how far you stretch the definition. Those listed are a subset of RASP machine models, which are a subset of turing machines, which is a subset of finite state machines, but as far as “general purpose computing architectures” that’s about it as far as I’m aware… Unless you get into weird application specific stuff like differentiable neural computers.

You could also go the other way and look at how the basic principles of those architectures get expanded on IE Von Neumann -> ARM -> Advanced Microcontroller Bus Architecture (AMBA) -> Advanced eXtensible Interface (AXI) -> etc.

But it’s not free, just because you aren’t paying in money doesn’t mean you aren’t paying for it in other ways.

There’s “if someone wants to use my work, they should pay me for it” and there’s “intentionally sabotage the work/service provided in order to extract more profits.”

It depends on the how the contract is written but generally billing a client the full time to develop an existing feature that “could be turned on in 10 min.” is a good example of fraudulent misrepresentation. A business/industry that replies on that (like your example) is a racket.

Yes, I understand that’s how the world of ‘software as a service’ works and yes I am calling it a racket.