Despite these machines, a person can easily spend an hour or two every day on common household tasks like cleaning the kitchen and doing laundry. That’s time that many people would love to get back.
There are ways to address this problem, but in any case this is still ultimately a very good problem for property owners to have. Their property value has increased dramatically. Being forced to move is inconvenient, but you do so with a large bag of cash.
That big bag of cash won’t buy a community where you know most everyone and have friends of decades or more whom you support and support you in return. Social connections take a long time to build and are hard to replace with cash.
You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Everyone wants their home to be worth more and more year over year but doesn’t want to incur any obligation for it.
How do you square that with the idea that communities and social connections are more important? Look at what California did with prop 13. It’s a disaster by all accounts. We need to switch models not create more complicated exemptions around property taxation.
Land Value Tax is more equitable and doesn’t have the intrinsic volatility and unpredictably of how we do property taxes today which is assessed in the unit value not the land and only punishes under utilization and vacant land holdings. This encourages building and to some extent smaller parcels of land per unit built
I would rather have my home than a bag of cash. I’m not even old, but I did grow up here and it has immense sentimental value to me. My grandma lived in her house for over 65 years, and died in it. I doubt she would have moved for anything short of multigenerational wealth.
It's the case for all large tech companies. Headcount increases in software engineering projects result in diminishing returns per-individual, but the increase is still there (if managed correctly). For example a 100 person team may not be 10x as productive as a 10 person team, but they may be 5x as productive. A 1000 person team may only be 3x as productive as 100. And so on until you have many thousands of engineers that can slowly move mountains and maintain massively complex and interwoven systems.
Also, development headcount begets support headcount. For every 10 new engineers you hire, you will need to also hire a manager for them. For every 20-30 engineers, you'll probably need a PM to steer the product and a PjM to handle all the additional communication/process overhead. For every 2-3 managers, you'll need an admin who manages their schedule and meetings. As the team grows, you'll need more people purely working on infrastructure, internal tools, build&release, security, legal, maybe doc writers, and so on, and they all need managers too. Suddenly you have 10K people.
Whenever we see these big layoffs, someone inevitably comes out of the woodwork to naively ask, "Why does Company X need 1,000 people?? I could do what they do with 8 engineers!" This is why.
Given that your article (from 2022) states Hertz will pay $168 million to people accused of stealing cars, it seems pretty unlikely Hertz is still making that mistake. Seems totally safe to me. Have there been any recent instances of this?
You raise a great point. Maybe they’re good citizens now. On the other hand the Italian restaurant down the street from me was shut down from multiple health code violations including roaches. They’ve reopened. But I’m super hesitant to trust a restaurant that couldn’t stay on top of their roach and other health problems. Or see Apple settling their patent infringement claims and now we’re here again with another patent infringement case. Maybe I’m just too cynical now. I think I’m going to need to see some glowing reviews and press about how Hertz is doing great with customers again.
Laws like this really don't address anything then. Children will continue to find and circulate "dangerous content."
As a mid-thirties millennial, I saw the transition. Kids shared paper pornography in the 90s, and had access to the most extreme and anonymous version of the early internet. I don't think either inflicted the kind of widespread harm mass surveillance proponents would suggest.
> Friendly reminder that prior to the popularization of the internet 20-30 years ago, there was absolutely no equivalent situation where you could have the kind of anonymity the internet provides.
It also wasn't possible for every action and thought a person had to be monitored by governments and corporations. We've gone way too far in our assault on privacy and desperately need to claw rights back.
I can't believe that this seems to be such a minority perspective.
I find it horrifying how many people seem to default assume that censoring is a good thing.
The internet may be harmful but it's not just a few explicit sites that you need to worry about. It's the whole thing. Either teach your kids to make good decisions or block them from the internet in full. There isn't a middle ground that works really. We are absolutely rocketing towards the worst kind of dystopia and it seems like a lot of people are on board with it.
Copying/sharing media is not the same as stealing from a store. We already had this debate like 30 years ago - "You wouldn't download a car!" Unless you really believe that borrowing a book from a friend deprives the author of a sale and that that's equivalent to pickpocketing $10 from the author.
Google has every right to restrict who gets to access their services (although antitrust concerns do come up) and every user has the right to control the software on their devices.
> Copying/sharing media is not the same as stealing from a store
This is different, you aren't copying youtube videos and sending them to a friend using your own resources, you are using their server capacity to watch it yourself.
So you are costing Youtube money just like stealing from a store costs the store money. So the old "copying is not theft" argument doesn't hold here. It does work for torrenting etc, but not when you stream directly from their servers.
Sure but the post I was responding to starts with "Would you use the same justification for pirating movies? Or for stealing from large supermarkets?", that's what I was responding to. Also in this context the situation is amusing to me given that YouTube's early success was built on pirated content. That continued for a long time even after Google's acquisition.
With respect to server/network resources, like I said Google is free to restrict access as they see fit.
> the post I was responding to starts with "Would you use the same justification for pirating movies? Or for stealing from large supermarkets?", that's what I was responding to
The post you responded to didn't say that those two were the same, it clearly shows those two as different levels of bad if you read the next line:
> "Not a pointed question, I just find it genuinely interesting where people draw the line."
So your point here is just you not understanding and reacting with a meme since his post sounded a bit similar to an argument you have seen before.
> and also brain can involve some quantum mechanics
A neuroscientist once pointed this out to me when illustrating how many huge gaps there are in our fundamental understanding of how the brain works. The brain isn't just as a series of direct electrical pathways - EMF transmission/interference is part of it. The likelihood of unmodeled quantum effects is pretty much a guarantee.
I like this take. The situation involving a women under a Cruise was initiated by a hit-and-run driver throwing her directly into the path of the Cruise. Given what I've seen in San Francisco, if it weren't a Cruise behind that car, there would have two hit-and-runs.
> if it weren't a Cruise behind that car, there would have two hit-and-runs.
As opposed to one hit-and-run followed up by a hit-and-drag-on-tarmac. If I were that poor woman, I know which I'd rather endure: I think a human driver would have the decency to back-up first.
I feel we're entering a 2nd great renaissance of media piracy and torrent sites. Fair streaming services were a great solution. But for a variety of reasons that all has slowly been corrupted and become obtrusive. I've recently cancelled my Netflix account after subscribing for over 12 years. Private torrent sites are reporting a significant increases in active users.
As a South African, it is ridiculous to me that I cannot even legally buy or rent some films that were produced in South Africa, and is about South Africa.
I cannot recall the details now, but this has happened at least 3 times over the last couple of months.
Machines for those tasks are already commonplace. Is loading/unloading them really that much effort?