_2d30

> People don’t realize sound was solved decades ago.

This really isn't true at all. HiFi has an obscene amount of snake-oil and non-rigorous design decision making.

Audio Science Review (https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php) has documented this very clearly and well.

Naturally no comments on change in governance or profit structure in these reflections.

He comments on the founding of OpenAI as though OpenAI the, currently, capped-profit company and OpenAI the non-profit which today controls it are the same thing. They are not and they are planned to be split, a split that cannot possibly be justifiable under the OpenAI (the non-profit) charter.

As I watch OpenAI's structural development over time, it becomes increasingly clear that the wildly incompetent board of OpenAI had something justifiable in their firing of Sam.

Then make it collapse in a spiral. Then, assuming you can make it infinitely thin, you can collapse into an arbitrarily small area.

> the root is the unholy alliance of government and capital power.

And Labor too, don't forget!

https://www.backstage.com/magazine/article/sag-aftra-back-an...

> Maybe not entirely seriously, but there is a direct causative path initiated by the United States that you can follow which lead to this result.

No, there isn't. There's a direct causative path initiated by Xerxes I when he launched the second invasion of Greece.

You could also argue that the earth is flat and lots of people do.

No one can rationally argue that that was partly the US' responsibility, though.

> So… if China mistreats their citizens, reciprocity says we must mistreat ours?

This is such a silly strawman. A better example would be that reciprocity would say that if China mistreated our civilians then we should mistreat theirs. Reciprocity doesn't mean "we do whatever China does".

> You don’t fight censorship with censorship. That doesn’t stand up to even the most cursory thought. You fight censorship with openness.

It's not censorship so this also doesn't make sense. They are being forced to be sold. TikTok can exist just fine, just not under control of ByteDance which is de facto under control of the CCP. The basic point here is that the CCP will not be allowed to control a major media arm in the US which is in turn used to spread CCP propaganda. If you want to prevent CCP from owning a major media channel which can freely spread CCP propaganda, this is a completely rational means of doing that stands up perfectly to "cursory thought".

> As soon as you find yourself arguing that you have no choice but to engage in the same behaviors you claim to dislike, you have literally become the enemy.

I hate violence but sometimes violence is required (see WWII). I don't think we (the US) became the enemy in WWII for engaging in violence.

> I never said this.

Here's a picture of your post: https://imgur.com/a/5E2sbHV

Sorry that you don't agree that the enforcement of laws is not authoritarianism and you are currently living in a liberal society. The vast majority of people who have lived in liberal societies for ages unfortunately believe that enforcing the laws that are made by either direct democracy or through their democratically elected institutions is good and just and I expect that will continue for a long while. You will unfortunately have to live in such a world where people are not allowed to do crime.

Your post is composed of outright lies and, charitably, ignorant analysis. It reads more like propaganda than an actual argument.

> They recently shot someone for fare skipping rather than simply removing fares, even though it's a massive loss to the city to staff the subway just to recoup a small percentage of lost revenue.

This is an outright lie as you likely know. They shot a man who charged at them with a knife. Don't believe me? Watch the body camera footage.

What's more, no major metro area in the entire world has fareless transit. Fares a key part of funding the operations of the public good and so is not something you "simply" do. NYC MTA prices are already extremely low (compare them against any other comparable Euro system) and have the option for low-income residents to pay half fares.

> has the highest police budget of any metro area in the world.

Simply taking a total budget and comparing it to other another total budget is at best a poor choice and at worst looks like more of a propaganda choice. Budgets would need to be scaled by population as well as local costs to make them remotely comparable. But what's more, to the extent that it's even true, it's quite marginal. The NYPD budget '25 is proposed at $5.75B[1] whereas, for example, the London MOPAC/MPS budget is 4.36B GBP[2] which converts to $5.5B. This was just the first major metro I checked!

What's more a _perhaps_ more reasonable way to look at this would be police officers per capita. Here we can see that NY is comparable to many other major metro areas [3] and significantly below some (eg Paris and Madrid).

But most importantly, the presence of police officers is not remotely authoritarianism. The enforcement of laws is not authoritarianism. The manner of restrictions, the immunity of the police and authorities above laws, the form of trial system, etc are what make up authoritarian systems and it is quite obvious that none of these characteristics remotely define NYC and it's a comedy to suggest so.

[1] https://council.nyc.gov/budget/wp-content/uploads/sites/54/2...

[2] https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2023-12/MOPAC%...

[3] https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10183480/1/global_citi...

[flagged]

The case is also going to radiate heat and turning it upside down will make that less efficient. The base won't radiate heat in the same due to being plastic and due to it already being used to pass air through.

You can subscribe to his blog with RSS: https://www.science.org/blogs/pipeline/feed

Are you specifically referring to post 10/7?

Prior, this was not true. Israel assessed a VAT customs fee which was then transferred to the PA. The US has an FTA with the PA which applies across Gaza and the West Bank.

> You can fire nukes from anywhere on the globe nowadays

ICBMs existed back then as well. If the nuke comes from too close, there is no ability to react with early warning systems. That was the core problem with Cuban Missile Crisis.

> Cold War was over before I was born, yet you’re still salty

Good point. Probably shouldn't be concerned about Russia either then!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine

Not directly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helms–Burton_Act

And yet the US trades openly with Palestine. Seems like maybe the issue with Cuba isn't entirely the US embargo?

> lmao it’s such a tiny insignificant island nation- I never understood why the US should be afraid of Cuba

lmao wait until you find out how much damage a nuclear warhead can do and how small they are. They can even fit on a tiny insignificant island nation!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis

https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

And yet billions in trade with the EU:

https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/isdb_results/factsheets/country...

I'm not missing anything. I was very clearly implying one specific point that Cuba has never been a "mostly developed country" and has been impoverished ever since Castro and the communists took over.

So you just made up a rationale for the embargo that's completely divorced from reality and then dunked on it? This would play great on Twitter or Reddit, you should post there as well.

The embargo doesn't exist because the US is correct in its assessment that Cuba's economic system won't succeed, an opinion shared by Cuba's largest trading partner: https://www.ft.com/content/9ca0a495-d5d9-4cc5-acf5-43f42a912...

Cuba wouldn't ally with the US in its current form. It's openly hostile to the US.

It's like suggesting Venezuela allying with the US.

Undoubtedly the US embargo and its extension of potential sanctions to foreign entities which violate are in part causes of a weak economy.

However, this is an incomplete picture. Cuba has essentially no market economy whatsoever. All evidence throughout history shows this is economic suicide and is undoubtedly an even larger cause of their issues. It's so bad that in the FT this week (https://www.ft.com/content/9ca0a495-d5d9-4cc5-acf5-43f42a912...) this incredible line is written:

"Chinese officials have been perplexed and frustrated at the Cuban leadership’s unwillingness to decisively implement a market-oriented reform programme despite the glaring dysfunction of the status quo, the people said."

That's the CHINESE (Marxist at least in name) government lamenting the lack of Cuban adoption of market principles.

Further, the article makes quite clear that the US Embargo, for whatever it is worth, doesn't extend to the entire world (which should be obvious) noting very specific relations with multiple major Chinese companies. So even though Cuba is clearly able to trade with the second largest economy in the world (with giant enterpries like Huawei and ZTE), with a population of greater than 1B, they are still somehow completely incapable of operating a function al economy.

What's more, a cursory understanding of Cuban history should show that they are avowedly enemies of the US having once attempted to host nuclear missiles aimed at the US. What is the US to do? Actively support a regime which has threatened tens of millions of its people?

> It's pretty rare for a mostly developed country to collapse into poverty without a war.

Since when was Cuba, post Castro, anything other than impoverished?

So just like half the world’s population then. Pretty much a total failure.

Just looked at the Apple App store and it's #1 in the Free Apps ranking lol

So pretty much just vague references to some studies? Your second reference link is literally just the title of a study and you cite nothing directly from it.

For the first study, you have conveniently focused on "supersonic flight" as the issue which is not the fundamental issue cited in the article (link isn't working for me, btw, I had to google it find it myself). The fundamental issue is in aircraft fuel and the sulphur based impurities it carries. Starship burns Methane and LOX. In general, these fuels (fuel and oxidizer) are typically kept as pure as possible and are unlikely to contain much more than trace sulphur impurities as there removal is a standard and well followed practice.

So for full clarity, your argument as presented here is completely without merit and it looks like your first study was intentionally presented in a way to obfuscate its extremely tenuous link to the issue at hand.

As an aside, you're also quite focused on your mood affiliation with the topic, doing things like asserting the motivation of those you reply to without any evidence (eg 'You willing to risk it because "space is cool"?'). This won't help you think clearly about a topic.

Tell me why we should be. Your answer can’t just be a vague reference to “some studies”.

That's not relevant to the comparison in any way.

A single truck requires more energy to operate in a year than 70k homes do!? I find this extremely difficult to believe.

As far as I can tell, the EIA [1] suggests the average home uses 10,791 kWh a year. A gallon of gasoline contains ~33.7 kWh of energy per the EPA/Wikipedia [2].

This would mean that a single truck would be burning 70,000 * 10,791 / 33.7 = 22,414,540 gallons of gasoline a year or 61,409 gallons a day. Seems like wild bullshit to me.

[1] https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=97&t=3 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent#:~:....