it is infuriating to live in a country where the president openly threatens journalistic organizations who don't spin everything about him to look good and I'm still supposed to pay my income taxes while the president is also ordering troops into cities as a display of force.
Countries are a bit like people, they only believe something (like that fire is hot) after they have experienced it first hand. The USA has never experienced fascism first hand, so, in general they ignored every one warning them about it. I fear it is already too late to stop it from unfolding. Trump might declare the midterms invalid and/or declare marshall law.
this is devestating. reading these messages to and from the computer would radicalize anybody. the fact that the computer would offer a technical analysis of how to tie a noose is damning. openai must be compelled to protect the users when they're clearly looking to harm themselves. it is soulless to believe this is ok.
A noose is really basic information when it comes to tying knots. It’s also situationally useful, so there’s a good reason to include it in any educational material.
The instructions are only a problem in the wrong context.
I think the biggest takeaway for people in the industry is that the reaction to perceived AI videography is overwhelmingly negative. Using AI to generate footage of real people immediately makes watchers suspect something needs to be covered up or counterfeited. People know what reality looks like, and sloppily subverting it will never be popular.
Many countries have rural water users subsidised by urban water users, because rural users need 100 times as much pipe buried and maintained per customer, but everyone pays the same rate for water.
Of course, in my country we tolerate that - it's normal for food to flow into urban areas and money to flow out, water pricing is just an obscure element of that.
In this case it seems like it's the reverse. The article claims the "bulk water" customers are responsible for 15% of the system's revenue but consume less than 1% of the water delivered.
I live in iowa - nearly everyone is on rural water because wells don't produce much water. I'm on a well and I can't water my lawn - after an hour my well is empty. My well is about a meter in diameter so that should be a lot stored. it would be $20k to extend the city water pipe to my lot.
i used to live in MN, there I knew farmers on a 5cm well who had no problem watering lawns, and 50 cows from the well.
in colorado where this story is water is less available than iowa. (most farms have a year round creek that could be treated to become drinkable)
That’s one of the real solutions - we shouldn’t be using potable water for everything. Houses that are plumbed on city water should have two water sources - potable and other.
They paid for the water that the municipality could afford to sell. They didn't pay into the municipality. If the municipality doesn't have excess water, why should they be forced to sell it?
People are saying they weren't paying into the municipality. That implies people paying into the municipality are paying for more than just water. The people buying the water were just buying water.
Now, maybe that's now how you think of it, but I'm sure you can see how others see it.
Even YOU understand the difference because you had to misrepresent what people were saying.
> They paid the municipality for the water, but they didn't pay into the municipality.
That's the difference. "into" doesn't mean they are merely paying the municipality, but rather, they are paying to support the municipality.
The people buying water? They are merely buying water that's up for sale. That's it. There is no implication beyond that. Intent matters.
And it's clear that the outsiders had no intention of supporting the municipality even if you want to suggest that was the case.
There is a very real legal and practical difference between paying for 100G of water, and paying for the right to buy 100G per week for the next N years.
Both have a price in the American west, and they did not pay the latter price.
it is absolutely wild that a 3-to-2 vote that wasn't announced beforehand could put so many people at risk. obviously governments haven't acted to serve the people since at least Citizen's United, but this is like, society breaking down shit.
The government in question here is the one representing the tax-paying residents of the town of Fort Garland. They voted to stop selling their scarce water supply to the non-tax-paying residents of unincoporated Costilla County. So it seems to me that the "government" served the interest of their constituents fairly.
How well does it serve those constituents? Shutting off the water cut off 15% of Fort Garland's water revenue (while reallocating 1% of its water). That's a big dent in a budget that was probably directly keeping those tax payers' taxes lower and providing them valuable services.
The water board didn't have to put it up to an immediate, unplanned vote that day, but they were inexperienced in dealing with "hollering" and waffled under a little pressure.
Add to it that they executed the short-term interests of their constituents with such ... alacrity that it put people in physical risk.
So who came out ahead here? I don't disagree that all those folks living off-grid really aren't living off-grid, and reality checks are healthy, but even a 2 week warning would have served everybody's interests, served the same FAFO lesson and maybe kept the animosity down a little.
'Fairly'. I would love to see them argue that with St Peter at the pearly gates. 'Well we drew this arbitrary line on the ground, and refused to sell water to people in the other side of the line so they could drink and survive. We did it so we could water our ornamental lawns'
If people need a job to have healthcare, it gives employers a lot of power. and because superpacs have allowed people with the most money the most say in american elections, the capitalists can just keep wringing people out.
Maybe you don't see it, but many folks would value the pro-social benefit as being worth more than the marginal costs of driving a car. Like, for instance, if you're living through a spike in pollution, you may be motivated to do your part to help.
extra bonus: blu rays work in a ps5, so i can just do that instead of trying to figure out the stream setup.