That's honestly pretty good, I can see world leaders coming together and just doing that.
There must be other technical challenges to this other than raw power usage
You're right, it's fantastical, but it's still worth talking about.
It's worth talking about as it solidifies the argument more than just assuming your opponent is acting poorly. The argument of "Even if Microsoft is a saint, it's still a bad idea. But we know Microsoft also has a history of data collection, spying, anti-patterns etc." is a much stronger argument than the latter half on its own
Using Copilot as a copilot, like generating boilerplate and then code reviewing it is still "babysitting" it. It's still significantly less effort than just doing it yourself though
I'm just saying that accepting your definition of anxiety being tied to apprehension, anxiety about the climate is still valid.
I would say your definition is correct, but your application is extremely limited. The anxiety is about things getting worse, it's a vague nebulous feeling that can apply 1ms in the future or several decades. Or even about finding out past information in the future (the unknown). Or just not knowing what the future holds.
So yes, being super pedantic, you can't really be anxious about the literal state of the literal climate literally right now, but it's instead about the possible future outcomes and events. But it's very commonly understood that when someone says they're anxious about climate change, they don't mean it in the super pedantic literal way
Capitalism is the process not the outcome, and you can't blame the sausage factory for making a sausage. The factory is just a set of circumstances that happens to produce sausages
centrally-planned systems are an aspect of capitalism
Isn't that the end goal of capitalism? Winning is having control of all the capital right? How can you divorce the implied, if not explicit, end goal of a system from the system itself?
pile of decaying bones is an aspect of a family pet.
How is this not an aspect? It's the inevitable end of any living thing, much like capitalism and the heartless exploitation of literally everything
This is however, a practice that results from the government being effectively corporate controlled. Which is the end result of allowing your free markets to run wild and allowing corporations to acquire that much power, money, and influence.
A pure capitalist system actively selects for this kind of bullshit. The most ruthless and unethical companies end up winning in the end. And those same companies are buying our politicians.
People blame capitalism when the system clearly favours the rich over the poor to such a dystopian extent that a man is allowed to be held hostage by a corporation
I think it's just because Twitter is a hellhole that often uses it to invalidate people, if not as a straight up insult. It may not be a slur on its own, but it sure is often used like one.
I can't justify Elon banning it, especially over other slurs. But l sure as hell can see why people can be offended by it for reasons other than that they hate trans people
Honestly, the best evidence they could provide to someone like that is suing Madison for defamation and winning. But they don't want that, I don't want that, and I'm sure you don't want that either. It would also look mega bad for LTT. Which is why I think they mentioned that they could sue in the post, but chose not to.
And it's not like some rando is going to be invested enough to pay a 3rd party to investigate LTT without a conflict of interest being there.
Everything else kinda needs to stay locked up due to employee privacy and data protection laws. So, I honestly can't see how they can "win".
I will say, LTT is a big corporation, and there is a massive power deferential between them and a single person. And given how difficult it is to stand up that, especially when you're afraid of rocking the boat and losing your job, plus how fucking annoyed I am about the Billet Labs debacle and how they responded to that. I still believe that most of what Madison said was true, or at the very least, she believes what she's saying is true
You kinda inherently do when you post on a public forum, the other guy's being a bit of a dick, but you can't just expect a circlejerk whenever you post your opinion
Yeah zero psychological risk is a bit of an overstatement. Zero physical maybe, but there's definitely psychological risks, and I'm not even thinking about child support
Edit: I can't read, it says physiological and I'm just deficient in the reading
But I understand your general point, you should be able to read the list of ingredients and understand what they all are right? Pasta being, flour, eggs, olive oil and salt is a much shorter list than whatever is in a microwave meal
That's honestly pretty good, I can see world leaders coming together and just doing that. There must be other technical challenges to this other than raw power usage