throwfaraway135

I agree that water is an important resource but the wording of "consumption" always rubbed me the wrong way. Is the water contaminated with chemicals? Maybe heat? Can people or wildlife consume it? Can you use rainwater?

As a rule decay accelerates as time goes on, won't be surprised if we see talent and wealth leave the city in a couple of years.

Thanks for the Fukuyama reference will look him up more. But my argument is not that homogeneous populations can't be low trust, but that diverse societies are almost always significantly more low trust than their counterparts.

Fukuyama wrote about the US and Germany in 1995 (probably from even earlier experiences) and in that span from 1995 to 2026 in the US and Germany the most prevalent groups percentages went from in 75.6%->56.3% and 91%->70% accordingly coinciding with drastic increase in "low trustiness".

For what it's worth I don't argue about right and wrong here but a clear correlation.

If you read canceling as part of the "cancel culture" and not canceling the subscription, then this two statements seam contradictory

> Cancelling "Hey"

> I definitely don't believe in trying to change people's minds by shouting at them or shaming them

Depends for whom.

For the people? No

For the trillion dollar bloated closed AI companies? Yes

AI submissions and AI judges a match made in (AI) heaven.

Kids need freedom to make their own decisions, without that they won't grow to be self realized adults.

For this specific issue, the solution is simple and straightforward: shaming. None confronted the pervert in the train, because no one knows what is acceptable today and what is not.

The EU governments face a lot of pressure from economic (inability to compete with China/US, pressure from aging population etc) and social (immigration, corruption) issues and their solution to all of this is to hide it under the rug with more censorship.

This is obviously another clickbait paper, their β = 0.18 meaning narcissism has a small effect.

If you are willing to mislead your readers from the first line they read (the title) how can anyone trust your research?

Considering who is on today's magazines, this is not surprising.

Anyone even a little bit active on the internet is getting "fuck you"s constantly, people need to harden up.

The problem here is the definition of abuse. And I don't mean to say that I'm 100% sure Godot overstepped in the github ban cases, but if they can ban people for criticizing them I wouldn't be surprised if they overstepped there too.

Mythical place to argue with people:

1. Your anonymous or whatever you say can't be used by another party against you.

2. There is a code of conduct that is strictly held (no interrupting, no ad hominem etc)

3. You can ask for time-outs and think before answering.

4. There is a bank of known knowledge that is considered true, very strict standards, as unbiased as possible, including confidence scales.

5. You are face to face.

Most of it was silly, but being banned on github for a reasonable objection is still very tyrannical.

Any advancement is going to increase inequality, the real issue is when AI starts to outmaneuver people with less IQ/education. This is much more of a problem for an avg 80 IQ population then a country with avg of 100 IQ.

Of course it's politics, you have billions of people thinking otherwise than what is accepted in the west.

This doesn't mean I agree with them, but pretending this isn't a complex and very large issue with multiple facets is just wrong.

As far as I can remember. There was a pro LGBT tweet that some people didn't like. And the moderator decided to blanket ban everyone who disagreed with the tweet. Some of the banned people had reasonable objections like: regardless if they agree with something or not politics and OS should be separated, and were still banned, including on GitHub. Others had objections also shared with the Godot founder and were still banned. There were some other things also but can't remember the details.

I get that, but again this seems like a quality problem. As for commitment a simple sorting algorithm which prioritizes repeat contributors should solve that.

Google Godot drama 2024, for some top-notch community mismanagement classes.

Doing an ad hominem for an argument about Unity/Godot is wild.

If Unity didn't commit hara-kiri I'm positive it would be much less successful.

> write one good PR

is about quality not AI which is exactly my point.

Wouldn't it make much more sense to just reject _low_ quality PR's?

On an unrelated note, I lost all respect and eagerness to try it out after the drama.

Chinese automakers are eating the low and mid-price range carmakers lunch. And it seems nothing helps:

- Local battery technology (Northvolt): Failed

- Taxes on Chinese imported cars: Failed (they are to cheep, and the EU doesn't want to be too aggressive)

Maybe because the son of a queen is a prince?

The problem with Google and others like it is they have almost zero customer support, this could have been an easy ticket created by a fan or Louis, but of course Google is too prideful to have humans in the loop.

AI is already too useful to discard, we could automate 90% bureaucracy and government jobs and no one would feel the difference. But of course fear/angst/rage sells.

The fixation on word level plagiarism is bullshit, tell me how much of the novelty is plagiarized.

I generally agree with the sentiment, but giving the UK government more power while it's already trying very hard to implement a Stalinist State is just not a good idea.

There were times when there were more slaves in Athens than citizens.

The Arab led slave trade flourished for much longer, by some records it is alive even today.

The words Slav and slave have the same root.

There were times when 30-40% of the Korean population were slaves.

The Mongols killed and enslaved half of the known world.

Totally agree, the British Empire has a lot of blood on its hand, but compared to its forebears and contemporaries it did abolish slavery, a tradition that has roots as old as humanity itself.