• 1 Post
  • 237 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 16th, 2023

help-circle

  • Yeah this is an example of corporate corruption, where enough voting shares are in the hand of a minority of investors and the leadership team is under their control.

    It is in no way a good idea for Tesla to give away $54bn. The only person this pay package is good for is Elon Musk.

    Elon is trying to extract money from the company because he knows it’s in decline. Profit is down since 2021, sales are down, and most of the crazy high value of the company is around expected future tech that is basically broken. Tesla’s self drive tech is broken because Elon Musk himself interfered to keep the costs down, and they are stuck with a lemon.

    Meanwhile their competitors are making more and cheaper electric cars, and also are further along in self driving tech. The idea of a fleet of autonomous cars that Tesla sold itself on is sound but it isn’t going to be delivered by Tesla.

    Tesla stock is a speculative bubble and it’s only a matter of time before it pops as people realise it’s not going to deliver the dream it claims. It’s conpetitors will. Tesla could have succeeded but the guy who didn’t even found the company fucked them by interfering.

    Elon Musk is nothing more than a loud mouth investor. He’s had a lot of luck in what he’s invested in but he himself is a moron.





  • This is such a bizarre story. First as others pointed out 1 in 125 is 0.8% not 0.008%. They presumably forgot the 100 but in percent conversions. It’s presumably 0.8% as if it’s 0.008% then they’re saying 9billion devices were sold on the last quarter. At 0.8% it’s 90million laptop devices. They later say 20% of all laptop sales were AI laptops at 13.3 million which would be 66.5 million laptops overall, not 90milljon. 720,000 would actually 1.1% of all laptops and 5.4% of the AI subcategory.

    So whoever wrote the article doesn’t seem to know how to do basic maths? They also don’t make clear how they arrived at their figures with these contradictory figures elsewhere in their own article.

    But the main thing is this whole story is some bizarre idea that a new device getting nearly 1% of global sales in its first quarter is doing badly?

    To me that’s actually good? But maybe the manufacturer had some crazy expectations? Or maybe the writers think that all products should behave like incumbents?

    This reads like shitty journalism - trying to make big claims to get clicks. I have no idea if the product is doing well or not versus expectations, but I don’t trust this articles take on it.

    I’m personally skeptical about the “AI” bullshit in these products, but I do think the power efficiency of ARM chips may give these Snapdragon X a chance to take market share from traditional chips.



  • All told Trump is up about 2m votes and Harris down 7m compared to Biden in 2020.

    This is not a massive increase in support for Trump but it is a significant drop in support for the Dems that lost them the election.

    The mandate “myth” is irrelevant. They won all 3 parts of government , they got their mandate.

    In the UK we had Brexit and it was extremely close at 48% to 52%. Yet ever since all we ever heard about is how it was decisive and people treat everyone in the UK as if we’re pro Brexit. In our elections the tories got 42% of the vote yet massive majorities so dictated what we did.

    In short the problem is not the number of voters, it is the electoral system. In the US system if you win enough votes in the right places you win decisively. That seemed like a good system when there was a consensus. Not so good when there is division.

    The solution in the US is the same as the UK - electoral reform is needed. The problem in the US is the same as the UK - no one will deliver that as the parties that win power are the ones who benefit from the rigged system.



  • As someone who drives in Wales a fair bit, it was badly implemented so it became unpopular.

    The blanket rule was applied to roads it shouldn’t have been, with a slow and costly process to fix the speed limits on roads that’s shouldn’t have been covered.

    It makes sense on all side streets, but it doesn’t make sense on all main roads. Some yes, but not all inside towns and cities. I think this is being unpicked it seems with more flexibility for councils? I don’t really follow Welsh politics, like many people I suspect.

    The other issue is enforcement or lack there of. There seems to be zero enforcement so you get into the situation of driving down roads and everyone is still going at 30 ignoring the law. It puts you under pressure to go at 30 and it’s easy to drift up to that speed.

    I’m am generally a supporter of the new law but the politicians have to take ownership that the reason it’s controversial is because it was poorly implemented. Its easy to paint the critics as extreme or as part of a “culture-war” but that’s just people taking advantage of actual anger and frustration.

    The policy can be popular I think - there just needs to be some minor changes. As an example I can think of 4 roads in the town I drive or walk on that could do with going back to 30mph; thats nothing in the 100s of roads in the area.

    It’d even potentially be safer as people are just breaking the law and speeding on these road anyway making it less predictable for pedestrians.

    An example is a long main road that climbs up a steep hill in my town. It’s actually a struggle. climbing it at 20mph, and I even get foot pain trying to keep the accelerator at just the right depression to stay at 20mph. The road is wide too so you’re struggling all the time with the accelerator, monitoring your speed as it’s natural to go faster on wide roads and other drivers putting you under pressure to go faster. People are even overtaking each other which can be dangerous as you don’t always see what’s coming down the other way easily.

    So I’d be worrying less about the fringe lunatics stirring up anger and more about tweaking the implementation to get the majority on board. That’ll take the support and interest away from the fringe noise makers.


  • For electricity generation: Solar across the UK was about 5% in last year, while Wind was about 29% and Nuclear 13.9%, and hydro 1.3% - so 49.2% of electricity generation over the last 12 months was carbon neutral.

    That’s a huge success story - still a long way to go, particularly as that does not include Gas burned in homes, but the UK is moving in the right direction. And Scotland is a huge source of Wind & Hydro power for the whole country.

    So even if the barriers to solar in your home are still high, the grid is getting cleaner and cleaner every year. There are also community projects installing wind generators which you can join/invest in if you do want to try and get a slice of cleaner energy and solar is not realistic.

    Edit: Source on UK electricity generation: https://www.energydashboard.co.uk/historical Good data on UK electricity generation



  • Yeah, one part of the prediction and fears raised about the republicans is it gives them far too much credit to actually run a government.

    They have held the house and the Senate before and then been crippled by infighting as with slim majoroties it only takes a few people to hold everyone hostage.

    Some of Trumps nominations may not get through the Republican controlled Congress.

    People seem to forget the republicans controlled all 3 parts of government in 2016 and didn’t get far. Yes they managed some significant things but tax cuts and supreme Court nominations are the main successes.

    This time Trump is making batshit crazy nominations which are likely to divide their own party in Congress.

    Gaetz nomination is particularly bad as he’s hated by a lot of Republican law makers. There are likely enough republicans who actually care about the legal system that his nomination will not get through. If it does get through then it’ll be a sign of how bad things can be. But it’s likely it will not get through and just sow seeds of discord between Trump and some of the republicans in Congress, poisoning more attempts to change things.

    I predict one hell of a shit show over the next 2 years, but probably not from what they do - instead from what they fail to do and the recriminations that follow. All those Republican law makers telling themselves that Trump is diminished, less of a threat, and that they can control him are in for a hell of a ride.



  • Yes it’s absolutely worth getting in to video games, there is huge breadth and choice on what to play, and a huge vibrant community.

    Starting place is really what devices do you have? Do you have a laptop or PC? If so the world is your oyster and you will find plenty to play even if it’s not very powerful.

    If you want something popular, cosy and accessible I’d recommend Stardew Valley. It’s cheap for such a great game, plenty of content, great learning curve and a huge wholesome community.

    But there is loads of choice - you could play card games or puzzle games on you other devices and explore what’s available. PC games offer much more variety and depth compared to a mobile, and is very easy to access - no need to buy a console or hardware.


  • For me I have no problem with this in KDE? Different browsers behave differently.

    For me Firefox either saves to last location used or a set directory depending on user settings. In about:config you can see browser.download.lastDir which is how this is done. KDE is not driving this, Firefox drives it. I do find that set up a bit annoying to be honest, but I like seeing the dialogue box each time rather than everything going into downloads folder.

    Chromium based browsers do it slightly differently, I think it’s per website if you don’t set it to a specific folder. Vivalidi seems to work that way for me anyway.


  • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.worldtopolitics @lemmy.worldBernie Would Have Won. Seriously.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    A lot of democrats could have won this election. Ultimately the big mistakes were allowing Biden to run unchallenged, then sticking with Biden until it was too late. Harris then had an impossible task to win.

    If the democrats had an actual democratic process, and put their best possible candidate forward they may have won. Instead this election was very much a repeat of 2016 - the wrong candidate, being favoured through to the election by the DNC. In 2016 the DNC closed ranks around Clinton because of fear of Bernie and also because of a crazy notion that it was “her turn”. Biden didn’t run when he should have. This time Biden ran when he shouldn’t have, and other strong candidates in the party didn’t get a chance.

    But it was more than the candidate - the election focus was totally wrong. 1/3 of the electorate did not vote - and this election is not a story of Trump breaking through. Trump got 74m votes in 2020 and about 74m now. The Dems got 81m votes in 2020 and 71m votes now - Trump is basically static; but the Dems lots 10m votes because they ran a bad campaign. Those missing 10m voters are in the 1/3 who are not included in polls; because Trump has not broken much above his 74m ceiling. The Dems floor fell out under them instead.

    The polls always showed 50:50 but that was just “likely voters”. Really 1/3 support dems, 1/3 support reps and 1/3 weren’t going to vote. That vast pool of people are not all never voters; the missing 10m are in there. THAT is where the Dems should have been going for votes. Forget the republicans; they should have been reaching out to the disinterested and disenfranchised. A positive message that actually addresses their concerns.

    The “moderate” Republican votes were never in play nor worth courting, and the abortion and democracy focuses were not the priorities of voters. The dems needed to listen to the actual voters - and the message of what the voters cared about is clear: the economy. The Dems needed to have a clearer message on the economy - “it’s doing great” does not tally with voters experiences who are living with high cost of living after inflation. Prices haven’t fallen back, they’ve just stopped rising as fast. The message to voters should have been “we’ve done some stuff but there is more to do” and offer clear policies are wage growth, housing/rent costs etc. Give the disinterested in particular something to vote for.

    So yes, maybe Bernie would have won. But lets not forget he chose to endorse Biden, not run in the democratic party primary. So it’s actually his fault too.

    Only Dean Philips, Marianne Williamson and Jason Palmer actually stood up and challenged Biden in the primaries, and they were criticised for doing so as if they were the reason Trump would win.



  • There is a difference between not campaigning on trans issues and being against trans interests.

    The Dems should have campaigned on issues that the electorate cared about like the economy, rather than focusing on issues like trans rights.

    For example Gay marriage has never been a central issue in a presidential election campaign, yet it was delivered. They can look after trans interests without falling into the Republican trap of focusing on it in a campaign.

    The dems would have been better parking the polarising issues like abortion, and focusing on winning votes from the 1/3 of the electorate who didn’t vote by listening to what their priorities were.

    The republicans vote is not much up on 2020 despite all the media hysteria - about 74m in both 2020 and 2024. Whats changed is the democratic vote has dropped massively from 81m to 71m - 10m votes lost. Those voters didn’t vote Republican, they just didn’t vote.

    So the Dems needs to appeal to the huge number of non-voters. They’re not never voters - they’ve voted before but they could not bring themselves to vote Democrat.

    The question is why the dems lost those votes. I’d contend that most people don’t follow politics and are not interested in abortion or trans rights or “threats to democracy”. What they care about is their own lives - can they work, are they paid enough, can they afford housing and food. The Democrats should have focused on a positive message and ideas for the economy to counter trumps economic message.

    Instead the Dems mostly ignored the economy and I even continue to hear them complaining that the stats show they did a good job on the economy. But people with low paid jobs don’t care if you created new jobs, and they don’t care that inflation has slowed - they care about their own low paid job, their now higher rents and living costs without pay rises to catch up. Inflation has slowed but not gone into reverse - the cost of living is much higher than it was 4 years ago and that’s what the Dems needed to address for voters.

    The dems could have won this. They don’t need to go to the right and be like Trump, they just need to have a clear message and plan to address the things that worry the american voters. Not just talk to themselves about issues they care about.


  • As people have said, you can add Jellyfin as a service to start with windows regardless of users being logged in.

    No one seems to have said how to do this.

    The easiest way is to use the NSSM open source tool - it stands for “Non Sucking Service Manager” and it gives a GUI route to create services, as well as some useful reliability and fall back functions.

    It can also be used from the command line if you prefer but regardless it’s probably the easiest way without faffing around with powershell or command line and in built windows tools (which do suck).

    Edit. The official website is NSSM.cc and it includes guidance on how to use it. There are also plenty of guides online if you search “how to create a windows service”.

    Edit2: the easiest way is to use the Jellyfin windows installer itself but the documentation is pretty vague on that and gives a warning about ffmpeg config. It should work but using NSSM will give you more direct control. I think the installer uses NSSM anyway.