601–610 of 648 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If only the DNC was interested in promoting candidates that work for the people and aren't just interested in lip service while mostly maintaining the status quo. Things could have been different. Imagine what 8 years of Bernie and a functioning Congress might have accomplished.
> Imagine 8 years of Bernie As a person who was born in the Soviet Union I can easily imagine that...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vibe coding is obviously not quite there yet right now. But in the future it will be. The output of agents will be just as correct and rock solid as the software from the most experienced software developers. We'll also have the additional advantage of there being existing browsers to use as an oracle to test against to ensure that nothing regresses.
It isn't even a matter of having rock solid AI. I wonder how massive of a test suite would be needed to catch regressions...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Terrible narrative. Lina Khan under Biden was more than willing to go after big companies. She was forced out because the American people voted Trump into office. Eight years of Sanders would have left us with a far more gridlocked country. The man has virtually no political talent.
I love Lina Khan as much as the next guy. But as you've already pointed out, it's kind of pointless if the fundamental problem is a malfunctioning executive branch (and a federal government with far too much power). But I'm going to need receipts on your claims about eight years of Sanders.
Sanders couldn't do that. How do you think he would have fared with Republicans?
He's never passed a significant bill of his own and focuses on renaming post offices.
The man has no political skill. As president he would have been a disaster.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You misread/missed "Imagine".
No. The "imagine" is only an elaboration on the (rather more definite) "things could have been different" claim, which I already contend is a fantasy. I mean, sure, I could also "imagine" a world where America throws out its corrupt and/or stupid politicians all at once and replaces them with sensible people, but it would be of similar plausibility and utility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I love Lina Khan as much as the next guy. But as you've already pointed out, it's kind of pointless if the fundamental problem is a malfunctioning executive branch (and a federal government with far too much power). But I'm going to need receipts on your claims about eight years of Sanders.
I can't prove a negative but consider that winning the Democratic primary requires convincing a bunch of left-of-center voters to support your plan. Sanders couldn't do that. How do you think he would have fared with Republicans? He's never passed a significant bill of his own and focuses on renaming post offices. The man has no political skill. As president he would have been a disaster.
This is what I take issue with. It's a heavy enough accusation that it needs receipts. It needs proper framing on why exactly the benchmarks you've listed are important for delineating political skill and why other benchmarks are not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are there now. Nobody is working on solving death/aging. You have to pay rent, go to work, companies have average Joe’s shilling for them. The entire society is death marching toward - well - death ! And nobody notices or cares in the slightest. The vast majority of people think they will live for all of eternity “in heaven” and many others just don’t even think about it. The shortness and pointlessness of their l…
What does solving death/aging mean? Humans have figured out an easy medicine to reduce weight, which is the number 1 causal factor in morbidity/mortality. There are also novel cancer immunotherapy medicines that are drastically increasing quality and quantity of life for cancer patients, like keytruda and blinatumomab.
For wealthy cancer patients.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. The "imagine" is only an elaboration on the (rather more definite) "things could have been different" claim, which I already contend is a fantasy. I mean, sure, I could also "imagine" a world where America throws out its corrupt and/or stupid politicians all at once and replaces them with sensible people, but it would be of similar plausibility and utility.
It's called a hypothetical, not a fantasy, and it is a device used to ground the discussion by giving us a baseline for comparison. I don't think this is a very useful discussion if we're going to talk past each other and not assume the best possible interpretation of each other's words.
I don't think we're exactly talking past each other. I think the problem is that you've misdiagnosed the problem as, like you said in another comment, "a malfunctioning executive branch", and don't realize the full scale of Congress's culpability. I honestly thought you would know what I was talking about regarding the feasibility of a "functioning Congress", but you apparently just think that's an important but trivial detail to mention. Woops.
Almost all the major problems either stem from or could at least be mitigated by Congress doing its job. This became very clear on the micro level when I worked in the federal government, but as far as I can tell it's true at all scales. Here's a macro example: a functioning Congress would have removed Trump many times over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm looking forward to an AI product that filters all consumed Internet content to remove ads. Now _that_ would be a killer feature.
Why do we need to throw AI at everything? It's a huge waste of resources for a problem that is/was easily solved by uBlock Lite (and other alternatives).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's not just Google, the Internet stops existing. Uh? No? The internet existed before being overrun by corporate presence. It still does. Advertising pays a lot, but take the ad money away and let it scale accordingly.
The worst thing about the modern internet is people's innate expectation that others will work/pay to entertain or inform them for free. What existed in 1993 was a cultural blip, it's never coming back, so let it go.
It's like free software. When it exists you can use it. When it doesn't exist you can't demand anyone to make it exist. And yet we still have free software. Not as much any more though as a lot of it changed to open source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It was just less of everything than Chrome. This is insane. As a power FF user, I don't think Chrome ever "got ahead". There were 2 reasons for its success (in order): 1. Made by a respected company that was killing everything in those days. 2. It was occasionally faster, and more stable. Feature-wise - it was always worse.
3. For a significant period of time (that continues to this day) websites were made using only Chrome as the target platform, turning Firefox into an eternal second fiddle that would occasionally break important/work websites.
And before that it was Netscape
All of this has happened before, and all of this will happen again.