Nice. Then what’s the Spanish equivalent?

I have only visited Rota. Neat place.

Wow, classic.

Merica

Here’s a clue:

If the paper isn’t terrible, it was AI…

😋

Vote with your feet. Have to leave the platform if you want to stick it to them.

This story, like most corporate stories these days, frustrates me.

This is a tale as old as time…the time when American corporations went to shit as our elected officials ensured there was no liability and realistic legal consequences to executes or MBA decision making.

I’m not a business scholar obviously. I’ve always been led to believe that in order for the world to turn and air to be breathable, corporations and businesses need liability protection for those who run it. Why?

If I kill someone with my car, even if it was completely an accident, I’m still liable right? Should I account for the death of that person, child, etc?

How would things not be better if, instead of the bottom line and stock price being the ultimate concern of CEOs, it was them not going to court to face charges because they allowed their company to kill people with its negligence? I know there’s some nuance here, but ultimately, I feel like everything sucks because there’s no incentive to care about anything but investors and greed.

If industry, aerospace or other, was run by people who cared about not killing people and going to jail, would they in turn ensure their design and production met the quality and ambition of the type of people here, discussing their accounts of cutting corners or experienced personnel just to save money?

Seems like meta views fediverse as a threat to monopoly.

I also wouldn’t say fediverse needs to embrace meta. It can continue being what is wants and meta has to account for it. Fediverse doesn’t have to be mainstream. Aside from Dev support, it’s probably better to stay niche.

I do agree both things are wrong. Meaning discrimination.

I think one person’s art in this case might be described as another person’s stunt.

Edit, as for whether it’s beneficial, not sure. I guess we’ll see.

https://mander.xyz/comment/9083214.

I’ll edit this, I can’t read the other stuff on the mobile version while responding.

Edit, I mentioned that because the whole place was male only until '65. I don’t think there was that much outcry? (It didn’t look it up, I assume that poster did).

There would be now in 2024 though.

Didn’t a couple of people mention that was all of it before a certain year?

I also had no idea museums might have had gender restrictions.

When I first read it, the thought that came to mind was how stupid it is in this age to do anything that is restricted by gender when the rest of the world is trying to eliminate that.

Once I read the part about the feelings, emotion, and experience the restriction brought was the actual art and not just the paintings, that’s when I thought it was clever. The definition of art seems to be ambiguous now, but I understand what she’s trying to to do and it’s still a clever in that it illicits an effect whether you wanted to visit the museum or not.

I think people say they understand or empathize, but don’t really know what it means in a specific context until they experience it IMO.

I have a stack of HP Gen 8 servers in the lab that I got off of ebay, for cheap. Cause they’re G8s…and not 10/11 :)

I would not have thought of this perspective if you hadn’t mentioned it. Thx.

Just make sure it’s HBA mode and it’ll be fine. Sometimes called IT mode.

Google IBM m1015 hba, there’s a ton on eBay for no money. It used to be TrueNAS go to. There’s newer HBAs that are faster, but I don’t think it will matter for you

If you do TN, you MUST read the manual and look at their ZFS intro guide. Trust me.

Now that I think about it, Johnny Harris did a really good report about insider trading by Congress.

The comment was meant to be syndical and sarcastic.

Of course it’s not representative of the entirety.

But it does express my frustration with political hypocrisy and insider trading. I think you’d be hard-pressed to find me any politicians that haven’t engaged in that at some point, to some degree. One of the famous ones that comes to mind is Nancy pelosi, but she is not alone, and this is not particular to one party or another, they both definitely engage in it, it’s been well documented and is irrefutable.

If you look past one party or another, you’d see that it’s a broken system. The fact that it’s legal for our elected representatives to conduct in activities that would otherwise be illegal for the general population is outrageous, and the fact that we all know they do it and they are the only ones that can control it in police themselves is also outrageous. It’s the only self-serving career that I can think of that is completely unchecked, has unlimited benefits for only 4 years of service, and the only ones that can control it or police it is themselves.

Ha, if it was that easy, I think the NSA would have solved that problem by now…

Imagine for a moment that the business world transitioned to Linux, and now there’s enormous incentive for all adversaries from state sponsored to financially motivated criminals to spend all their time hunting through linux source code.

• Do you think the ideas above stand up? (I’m not saying they dont)

• Would linux vulnerabilities be found at a higher rate? I wonder if they aren’t now because there aren’t as many eyes on them. Sure there’s corporate side project efforts and volunteers, just curious how that stacks up against the amount of research happening to break Windows systems.

• NSA would definitely want to keep some linux exploits around if their adversaries were using linux instead of windows. I think the result would be the same regarding eternal blue.

being spied on by the government of the country I live in than by a government from a foreign country

Ha, that’s a decent point. I don’t really care for either. I think about these things among others:

• China has proved they are interested in conflict. They haven’t used any kinetic/traditional warfare against anyone lately, though they seriously want to with Tiwan.
• China has been using nonstop cyber related warfare to conduct espionage, steal trade secrets, position themselves for assisting kinetic warfare with cyber warfare, etc.

I am not a direct target of these, but China killing the power grid or disabling telecommunications does have the potential to have a huge impact on my life.

• The US government has used nonstop kinetic and cyber warfare over the last 20+ years.

The US playing world police doesn’t directly threaten my safety, but I definitely would be more worried about the US than China if I wasn’t a US citizen.

The US government spying on me:

• Super annoying mostly due to the principle of a lack of privacy, regardless of whether I do anything bad or not
• Becomes a serious problem if I was an active opponent of government policy and elected officials, and the government/leadership deems me a terrorist/insurrectionist/etc.

Their discretion of what’s my free speech and right to criticize the government vs leading insurrection would be more complicated if they were using the NSA to own my life and try to use any excuse to lock me up.

I guess I weigh what’s more likely to be a problem in my current/future life.

I don’t like either of these scenarios.

I hear what you’re saying. I counter with low effort LLM reply. I don’t live by what LLMs say, but they generate some good starting points to go and do much more narrow research.

I don’t think it’s entirely Reagan’s fault, I think the idea existed before him. He just sold the idea to the American public. So I guess I could fault him for either believing in it, or just saying he did to support the desires of the wealthy.

this really is Reagan’s fault with his so-called trickle down economics

CLAUDE 3:

“Did any American politicians, economists, or general capitalism principles regarding ‘trickle down economics’ exists before president Reagan? What examples of trickle down economics existed before him? Did he invent the idea, or just the phrase?”

The concept of “trickle-down economics” predates President Ronald Reagan and his administration’s economic policies. However, the specific phrase “trickle-down economics” became more widely used during Reagan’s presidency to describe his economic policies, which were based on the idea that reducing taxes on businesses and the wealthy would stimulate economic growth, creating more jobs and wealth that would eventually “trickle down” to the broader population.

Examples of trickle-down economic principles before Reagan include:

1. The “Horse and Sparrow” theory, attributed to the French economist Jean-Baptiste Say in the early 19th century, which suggested that if the rich were allowed to get richer, their increased consumption would benefit the working class.

2. In the 1920s, Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, under Presidents Harding and Coolidge, advocated for lower taxes on the wealthy and businesses, arguing that it would spur economic growth.

3. The “Laissez-Faire” economic policies of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which favored minimal government intervention and regulation, with the belief that unfettered capitalism would benefit society as a whole.

While Reagan did not invent the underlying economic theories, his administration’s policies and rhetoric, particularly the use of the phrase “trickle-down economics,” brought the concept to the forefront of public discourse and became closely associated with his presidency.

It’s important to note that the effectiveness and fairness of trickle-down economics have been heavily debated among economists and policymakers, with critics arguing that it primarily benefits the wealthy and does not necessarily lead to broad-based economic growth or income redistribution.