Solar is so much cheaper than Nuclear and the efficiency sway is so reasonable, it’s still the better option in non-ideal circumstances.

With initial cost of deployment being the biggest obstacle to nuclear, I’m not sure it will ever be the best green option for developing countries.

This is doubly true since it’s lifetime cost-per-kwh is much higher than that of solar.

You’re not wrong, but I’ve also worked at companies that successfully contested unemployment claims. It can depend by state, but “it was entirely this person’s fault” is a bad start. Employers win about 30% of contested claims, and then about 15-20% of appeals (#1 cause for an employer losing a contested claim or an appeal appears to be withdrawing or not showing up for it). (Some numbers)

And the main reason employers lose when they show up is lack of preparation. In a case like the above, if they can show a policy (preferably one signed by her) that directly forbids her onlyfans account, they probably have a pretty good case to shut her down.

That said, they’re very unlikely to waste their time and money to fight it. Ultimately (as my current employer’s HR put it) “it’s just a cost of doing business” and a waste of money to pursue.

She was terminated “for cause”. To get unemployment, she’s likely to have to fight for it. She’s likely to win, but it’s not a free thing.

There are valid criticisms to UBI (usually specific to each implementation), but “lazy workers” will never be one of them.

Simple answer. Most of us (and most of the world) thinks At-Will employment is barbaric.

It is entirely reasonable to require some substantive effect to warrent termination, even if that substantive effect is not directly the teacher’s fault. Her having an onlyfans account, not grounds for firing. Her onlyfans account passed around by students? Grounds for termination.

There’s a (not so new) trend in the US for companies to crack down on side gigs. Yes, sex work is a politically charged side-gig, but we shouldn’t ever be supporting a company’s right to fire people having side-gigs without a very good reason. So long as your side-gig never encroaches into your day job in any real (not hypothetical) way, there really isn’t a good reason.

HR where I work is excessively paranoid about terminations. They will want a paper trail of performance failures or argue to death that “then they’ll be able to argue they were really fired for a protected reason. Get me a paper trail of performance failures”.

Not saying our HR is worker-friendly. They’re just VERY lawsuit-averse.

Flip-side, I worked at a company that fired anyone for any reason and just kept cash aside for wrongful termination suits. And they had a HUGE HR team, whose job it was to keep the employers happy.

At Will employment. “In a meme” is not a protected class, and a reasonable bank employee could see her meme-attachment having a detrimental effect on business (you don’t have to be in your reasons for firing someone as long as those reasons aren’t protected or being used to hide that you’re firing them for a protected reason). I’d guess she’d have no case in almost any state in the US with their lack of employee protections.

One thing of note with the Steam Deck is that it CAN stream games from your PC, allowing you access to your whole library. You get access to fewer games in SteamOS (there’s still a ton). You can always look up what games are natively compatible with Steam Deck before you buy. The big ticket games are usually compatible nowadays (Starfield was markedly absent, but BG3 is there all-the-way).

I don’t really get people saying fuck Nintendo. It’s their IP, and Yuzu team was pretty blatant it’s made for piracy

Because a significant percent of people have always seen IP as theft and IP lawsuits as shakedowns. Real Talk - IP was codified to solve one problem (it wasn’t casual piracy, it was inventors being ripped off by evil businesses), and it made that problem worse. We should’ve just thrown it out from there and tried something else, but then the evil businesses convinced the soccer moms that their little Billy listening to Metallica on Napster was everything wrong with this country.

It’s not what you do when you try to stay under the radar

And people walked down the street smoking pot in my state before it was legalized. We still said “FUCK the war on drugs” when they got harassed by cops.

Are you referring to Presh Talwalkar or someone else? How about his reference for historical use, Elizabeth Brown Davis? He also references a Slate article by Tara Haelle. I’ve heard Presh respond to people in the past over questions like this, and I’d love to hear his take on such a debunking. I have a lot of respect for him.

Your “debunk” link seems to debunk a clear rule-change in 1917. I wouldn’t disagree with that. I’ve never heard the variant where there was a clear change in 1917. Instead, it seems there was historical vagueness until the rules we now accept were slowly consolidated. Which actually makes sense.

The Distributive Law obviously applies, but I’m seeing references that would still assert that (6÷2) could at one time have been the portion multiplied with the (3).

And again, from logic I come from a place of avoiding ambiguity. When there is a controversiallly ambiguous form and an undeniablely unambiguous form, the undeniably unambiguous form is preferable.

And don’t confuse things. We’re talking about intelligence here. Not learning

Are we? Alright. Can you describe a definition test for intelligence that we could agree upon that humans pass and no NN or other ML is capable of passing? I suspect you’re confusing things. Not an intelligence,learning comparison, but an intelligence,consciousness confusion.

That’s not really an accurate take of how machine learning typically works. Neural Networks (allegedly) learn in a way similar to how humans do, taking the data they are fed and building a weighted matrix of resolutions that seems most compatible. A historically interesting trait is that neural networks are often better pattern-discoverers than humans.

But note, the outcome of a neural network is NOT a “random combination of the information we feed them”>

is pseudo-intuition (eventually) coupled with proper rationalization (the only part of intelligence computers can systematically do) enough to replace most tasks humans do?

I feel like this is a hard question to answer since it is based off controversial takes about ML. I am not a brain-is-a-computer hypothesis adherent, but we’re talking about specific learning mechanisms that are absolutely comparable to human learning. Is “the learning humans do” enough to replace “the learning humans do”? I would say obviously yes.

MAD was always criticized, but that criticism becomes more and more valid each year. There’s too many options and opportunities on the field. A Second Strike is not guaranteed in the modern world. There are countless examples where soldiers or others in the chain of command will not obey a “destroy the world” order.

I’m not saying any country should take the gamble, but there are enough ways to put your thumb on the scales that a nuclear solution against a nuclear power could become feasible (if genuinely terrifying) in many hypotheticals.

While you’re right, let’s not incorrectly imply that ML (especially Deep Learning) has never come up with new ideas.

Yes, it comes up with new ideas from old information, but some have argued that’s what humans do. We all stand on the shoulders of giants, who themselves tood on the shoulders of nature.

The world of Go/Baduk might interest you on this topic. If you’re not aware, Go is one of the oldest and most complicated board games in history. In 2016, after years of trying, an AI “did it”, beat the world’s best Go player. In the process, it invented many new strategies (especially openings) that are now being studied. It came up with original ideas that became the future of Go. Now, ameteur Go classes teach those same AI-invented Joseki (openings). In some cases, they were strategies discarded as mistakes, but the AI discovered hidden value in them. In other cases, they were simply never considered due to being “obviously bad”.

Your last phrase is a deep misunderstanding for AI. “when it’s entirely trained to mimic us”. In the modern practice of ML (which is a commonly used modern name for a supermajority of so-called “AI”) is based around solving problems that are either much harder for computers than humans (facial recognition, etc), or unfathomably difficult on the face.

Chess has more possible positions than exist molecules in the universe. Go is more complicated than chess by several orders of magnituce. You can’t even exhaustively solve for the 4-4 josekis without context, nevermind solve an entire game of Go. But ML can train itself knowing only the goal, and over millions of iterations invent stronger and stronger strategies. Until one of the first matches against a human, it plays at a level that nearly exceeds the best Go player that ever lived.

What I mean is… wargaming (as they call it) is absolutely something I would expect a Deep Learning system to become competent at.

He’s basically threatening to move to a subscription-instead-of-purchase model. They’ve toyed with this idea for years, and have been trying to normalize it.

These memes are always using terribly structured logic to justify piracy.

Agreed. Nobody needs to justify piracy. Piracy is automatically justified because the reasons people justified banning piracy were bad-faith. Digital IP is theft whose only purpose has failed.

Subscription models are great when they’re not trying to fuck you. There are upsides and downsides, but if you have options between subscribing with a one-click unsub or buying games and you choose subscribe, it might just be for good reason.

I got Game Pass because I wasn’t sure I’d like Starfield. I now have 20 games installed (including Starfield) and just pause game pass when work is too busy for me to get value out of it. I’m at about $70 total spend. Yeah that’s more than starfield, but I’ve enjoyed close to $500 in games, some of which I either wouldn’t have bought and love or WOULD have bought and am glad I didn’t.

But if somebody makes you pay $20/mo for Dildo Simulator, and colors and sizes are paid DLC, then they’re just trying to fuck you.

Intimidation and threats is the whole plea deal system by definition. “We’re going to charge you with all these crimes and get you 20 years if you don’t plead guilty to jaywalking”. Doesn’t matter if you have a strong case, or if they don’t have a case at all, when they have even a weak case to ruin your life. As my attorney (long story, civil case) puts it “once something gets to the jury, it can always go either way”.

But, as the bootlickers will say, the courts will be overwhelmed if EVERY person we lock in a cage has their day in court!!! They can cry me a fucking river.

There will never be justice in our country as long as there’s a plea deal system.

When you do, you’ll find out he did more things (more folks’ tax returns, though he didn’t publish those AFAIR). I’m sure he pled to this crime because of those other things. But that doesn’t really justify maximum sentence for what he was found guilty of.