When were LLMs invented for good?

Also how about vaccines? Hand soap? Photography? Water purification plants? Solar panels?

What is a monotonic decrease?

(did i answer your Jeopardy prompt correctly?)

Because of their effect, their media positioning, and their cost. These monuments are from the 20th century, when clean alternatives were more expensive and less efficient, so the defunding of nuclear directly fed into increased fossil fuel consumption. And thus into increased pollution, climate change, war, and airborne radioactive waste. Any activist could have seen this.

As for media positioning, it is always very clear whether corporate media support or oppose a cause. Climate activists are disruptive weirdos that get arrested while people whose lives they slightly inconvenienced are interviewed over shots of backed up traffic or a wide-angle shot of a handful of activists amidst a lot of context. Anti-nuclear activists are concerned citizens who get interviewed to low crowd shots that show even small groups as a throng, or lower-middle class moms and pops interviewed at home about their worries for their kids’ health, cut with ominous shots of drinkwater-safe water vapor coming from cooling towers.

As for cost, first there’s the monuments themselves. Grassroots activism tends to have lots of people with hodgepodge equipment, while astroturfing has fancy tools and either a handful of people to operate them or contractors. These monuments are massive projects built by contractors designed by handfuls of individuals. It fits the pattern.

Second, there’s all of the expensive storage. No capitalist government is going to waste millions of dollars listening to their people’s objectively excessive safety concerns, unless it directly benefits the rich people they have made corrupt deals with. Nuclear safety laws were designed to keep nuclear power more expensive than fossil fuels, because if the safety standards were reasonable then it would blow fossil fuels out of the water and threaten the justification for funding the military-industrial complex.

Even now, a quarter of the way through the 21st century, if nuclear power safety standards were reduced merely to those of wind turbines and solar panels - where people regularly die from falling, electrical fires, electrocution, etc. - nuclear power would probably be cheaper than renewables.

These monuments are some of the most blatant fossil fuel propaganda to hit the mainstream.

Oh no, nuclear is so scary, we have to warn our possible descendants 100,000 years in the future even if all cultural continuity is lost because we care so much for the distant future. Climate change? Oh don’t worry, it’s just your grandchildren and everybody after them that will have to live through a mass extinction event, you have nothing to worry about.

Nuclear waste? Well, sure, you could keep it perfectly safe by putting it on a grate in a bathtub, but that would require maintenance once every decade or so, and that’s just not acceptable. Now by law you have to bury it in a geologically inactive region where it can be guaranteed to not leak in the slightest for the next million years without any human intervention. Leaded gasoline and car exhaust made half the population angry xenophobes and kills hundreds of thousands of people per year? Cost of doing business, I’m afraid.

This is the way. Voluntary support of artists rather than mandatory support of IP holders and gatekeepers.

She got the problem solved while heavily under the influence of narcotics. Seems rude to call that “not being made for emergency situations”.

Depends on the model and training regimen. So likely no; it’s an engineering problem and they have good engineers and money to burn.

I’m not changing phone ecosystems, as I enjoy having some marginal level of control over* the hardware I fucking purchased*.

Open source android forks exist. Open source operating systems exist. Phones that natively run both exist. Do you mean that you specifically enjoy having maginal control, no more, no less?

On the other hand, they actually get to talk to the people they make food for which is a nice human moment, the restaurant doesn’t lose money to some shitty app company, you might be more likely to give a good tip to somoene you speak to, and the workers get paid by the hour. As long as there’s at least one worker who enjoys taking calls as a way to get a break from the kitchen, everybody benefits.

The Dutch postal service treats letters and packages differently, and electronic greeting cards are processed as letters. They probably didn’t formally recognize letters could contain electronics.

Dutch bureaucracy also tends to have a lot of tolerance/leeway (gedoogbeleid), where rather than fix bad policies everybody just sort of agrees to do things a “reasonable” way. Attempting to fix bad policies can be seen as an expression of mistrust, a threat to whatever people have been getting away with so far, or general narc/snitch behavior. So even if someone realized that electronic greeting cards could be a threat vector, it would have been rude/socially isolating of them to bring it up and deny everybody on board their cute electronic greeting cards from back home.

I’m saying to check theory when and only when you have a problem you don’t have a satisfying answer to. That will happen a lot, but each time you will be motivated by the problem, and eventually you may learn to trust a theory enough to appreciate reading about problems you haven’t faced yet.

Boredom isn’t a lack of entertainment, it’s a lack of interest. Learning something challenging feels frustrating, captivating, even maddening, but never boring.

I can’t really argue with you about this because I’m just pulling from my own personal experiences here.

In the business, that’s called “anecdotal evidence”. The reason you can’t argue with me is because anecdotal evidence is kind of irrelevant compared to the statistical observation that children spend decades reaching a median fifth grade reading level.

I assume you’re talking about

No, I’m talking about you, dear liberal hippie, having a community that can survive a transition away from capitalism. Once you have that you can talk about the finer details like what to do once you’ve survived or what to do with the labor left over after you’ve done what is necessary to survive.

Unlike the USSR, we now live in a world where food production is highly commercialized, globalized, and industrialized. What if John Deere used Starlink to brick every tractor in your revolutionary polity with a malicious software update? What if the same happened with every food processing factory and food warehouse?

If they are interested in it, then why is it boring to them? Genuine question.

There is value in learning things that at first glance seem boring or dry.

Is there? If the school system is any indication, people can spend literal years studying things they find boring without retaining them. Plus they can develop a hatred for the subject. Plus all sorts of bad intellectual habits like pretending they know the answer so they’re allowed to move on.

I agree that things that feel boring to someone can turn out to be important to them, but that’s a contextualization issue, not a nose-to-the-grindstone one. As the game design adage goes; you have to show the lock before having them hunt for the key.

Things seeming boring and dry is your mind telling you that you’re trying to learn something that isn’t interesting to you. Fancy tricks to hide that core truth won’t undo it.

Why do you think you want to learn Marxist theory? To have status among leftists? Go punch a Nazi. To understand modern or historical leftists? Their actions aren’t guided by Marxist theory. To have status among political theorists, economists, and liberals? Lol. Lmao even.

To gleam a better way to have a succesful revolution that results in a better society? Okay, cool, do you have a community of people that won’t starve to death within days of trade being cut off? If no, congratulations, now you know all Marxist theory that you need to know until you do have such a community.

[relevant smbc]

Please block this community, it’s meant for questions like this.

Mines don’t need to be maintained actively, so it would make sense if Iran were about to lose its capacity to sink ships in the strait by other means. As the US said would happen a few weeks ago.

So US media said Iran would or did mine the strait. And sometimes people believe propaganda even if they know better than to trust it.

That just isn’t true. It takes far more people to build, maintain, and service airplanes and the infrastructure to support them than to do the same for trains, and even when traveling a train requires fewer personnel per passenger-kilometer. Airplanes and cars are massively subsidized, and their uncovered externalities are much more costly to society too.

IMO that’s what the “throwing at” is meant to convey. The person doing the throwing is doing it at a distance and with low accuracy.