The issues that you’re pointing out are reasonable concerns, but I think you’re falling into a common mental pitfall that assumes that the implimentation must resemble the most similar past approach, while also decrying the irrationality of using those unsuccessful methods.

It doesn’t need to look like government cheese. It doesn’t need to look like “the projects”. All of those programs had systemic flaws that were specific, observable bad public policies.

Universal housing can look like the government acquiring existing apartments from disinterested landlords that are out of compliance and then granting them on a $1 lease in perpetuity to local neighborhood coops so long as they maintain it well. Universal food can look like mandates for grocery stores to provide non-profit collectives unfettered access to discarded items that are still perfectly edible instead of locking up dumpsters full of food that can feed people.

You can have a UBI too. I’m not shitting on the idea. But as you already pointed out, single payer healthcare is a great demonstration most people don’t even argue with. Implement a UBI, but where options exist for direct services, provide them and you won’t need nearly as large a UBI, and you can cut out tons of waste.

Free public transit is another great example. Do you want to have to include bus fare in the UBI? Or would it just make sense to make the buses and trains fare-free.

The university & school examples seem silly. Why give people a voucher instead of just reimbursing all accredited schools directly and let folks enroll anywhere without having to manage a budget? Just make them tuition free. Otherwise, you have to make a UBI large enough to pay all the administrators that exist just to process payments, and manage the size of vouchers… The UBI would go so much further if folks didn’t have to pay for things that don’t need market guidance at all. So many unnecessary middle-men.

UBIs make sense when you want to benefit from market guidance. They’re great for that, but for lots of things everyone uses or where consumer selection mechanics break down, there are tons of ways to make them free at the point of use. Is management and corruption a potential problem? Yes… regardless of which system you implement. So you might as well use the best tool for the given need and learn to do it well.

Yes… BUT I’d actually encourage people to consider an even better alternative, which is Universal Basic Services.

As you point out, giving people money is no guarantee that their spending power will be enough to cover their needs. I’ve heard it said that any UBI which is sufficient is unaffordable, and any that is affordable is insufficient. I think it’s still a policy we should experiment with, and I think even a small UBI could elevate poverty. But a more effective alternative is to try and provide essentials directly, free of cost.

What this looks like is publicly owned housing; a robust, fully-funded public education system that includes pre-K and higher ed; universal healthcare; and free food. Some of these – like housing and food – sound shocking and difficult, but to an earlier generation, so would the others. And we already have some of these programs for the very poor. The key to executing them is to bypass markets. Markets will always raise the cost of essentials because the demand is unlimited. Instead of paying private landlords for housing, the state or non-profit entities need to own the homes. There will still be costs associated with maintenance, but there need be no dividends or investor profits. Same with food. We might not be able to make everything in a grocery store free. But if you have well-run local gardens, they’ll actually produce a substantial amount of food that you can just put in baskets by the entrance and let people take from.

Unlike UBIs, which are inherently inflationary, UBS programs are deflationary. By offering free goods they create competition against market prices and make the stuff people still pay for (with a UBI) cheaper.

If you’d like to see how all of this works, go check out the tabletop RPG my friends developed at c/fullyautomatedrpg, or the world guide for the setting at https://fullyautomatedrpg.com/resources.

Yeah. Everyone who got mad at him is basically like, ‘Hey! Fuck you, asshole, for selling before I got a chance to sell! I wanted to do that, but you did it before I could do it! No fair!’

Also: the coins are now with far more than when he sold. So strangely, the folks who got rug pulled ended up with an actually valuable coin and an opportunity to sell at a high price. Which makes zero sense to me. But they apparently have no reason to complain. It worked out great for everyone, somehow.

Very stupid.

I believe today is actually the sixty-fifth of the month.

The seventy-second is next Sunday.

Yeah, good choices.

Have you watched Kaos, btw? I’m on the last episode. It’s a shame that they didn’t renew it for a second season, but it’s great. I can’t wait to see what happens to Orpheus and Riddy.

Everyone in that story is basically an asshole.

They’re all somewhat sympathetic. But yeah, the Sith suck, but so do the Jedi. This was also kind of emphasized in the Acolyte. But even before that, yeah, if you look at the prequels the Jedi were kind of dicks.

I think what you and @mossyfeathers@MossyFeathers@pawb.social are picking up on is that youth-coded descriptors are often terms of endearment. They’re often used flirtatiously and towards people of whom you feel protective.

Conversely, adult names imply responsibility. Is it a problem to describe men in a way that implies responsibility and women in a way that implies protectiveness? Not necessarily.

I just think this stuff is linguistically interesting. I think it’s more grammatically typical to use equivalent terms to create parallel construction when comparing the sexes. Again, no judgment is intended.

Alright.

I just like words and linguistics. No one needs to be the bad guy here.

I think it’s interesting that you are comparing “men” and “girls” as opposed to either boys and girls or men and women.

No judgement. Just thought that was interesting.

I totally agree.

Frankly, Mozilla should be embarrassed to have released this statement.

It’s basically ‘Please don’t harm our competitor for corruptly bribing rivals! We like those bribes very much!’

I think his intense commitment to getting Trump elected makes more sense when you consider this article.

His enormous wealth is largely stored in the form of Tesla stock, and that stock has been valued based on the belief that it isn’t a car company, it’s a robotaxi service currently selling the hardware to finance the software development. The value – and his wealth – can persist indefinitely as long as investors continue to accept that premise, no matter how long delayed. But if something tangibly undermines that premise, Musk could conceivably lose the majority of his wealth overnight.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Agency is probably the greatest threat to his wealth. He doesn’t worry about competitors or protestors or Twitter users or advertisers. They’re all just petty nuisances. But the federal regulator over roads… that is his proverbial killer snail. And I think fully capturing the entire federal regulatory state is his strategy to permanently confine that snail.

More than anything else, I think that’s what is motivating his radical embrace of fascism.

I feel like I’d you think about this for even a minute this seems like the worst possible idea ever.

I mean, sure it’s an achievement. But so is smashing the moon into the Earth.

At least 13, likely less than 19. Where you land is contextual to neighborhood and costume. And any age if you’re with someone under 10.

Honestly, that’s the main thing I was thinking.

Can I offer some constructive critique?

This meme is getting downvoted because it is both a fairly dumb concept but also a very unsatisfying execution.

You need to take your idea and communicate it in a meme response. It could be a meme representing confusion or sarcasm, but adding “Breaking New…” as bottom text is really not going to go well even if everyone thought your opinion was good.

This is so exciting. I worked in a lab where we were trying to do this, and so I was very aware what a gold rush we were in. I’m so glad to see that it’s actually happening.

This is truly a watershed moment in science. This is going to mark a major turning point in cellular medicine from theory to commonplace care. Eventually, this will end the pharma industry’s insulin cash cow.

But it’s even bigger than that. Because once we can engineer cells that produce a natural product, the next step is to engineer cells that produce synthetic medicines. Antidepressants, birth control, hormones, weight loss drugs, boner pills… The frontier is huge, lucrative, financially disruptive for pharma companies and life changing for patients. This is a big moment in history, and we all need to be fighting harder than ever to end for-profit healthcare. Otherwise we’re going to end up with subscription licenses to our own bodies.

You messed up the format.

The caption should be “Why would Socialism do this?”

Thanks for sharing this. I wasn’t familiar with this channel, not I’m liking it.

I just read that this guy was part of Nebula and was forced out. It’s remarkable that he’s forced out for speaking openly and defending his beliefs when Isaac Arthur is tolerated despite having much more onerous politics but having them in secret. Smh.

Amen. It drives me fuckin’ nuts anytime – in business as well as in sci-fi and general discussion – when people envision a society made perfect because it’s run by a genius computer.

For pretty much every challenge society faces, the major obstacle is not that we’re unsure what to do or lack the intelligence to solve. We already have all the solutions, it’s just that our decision making systems are completely disinterested in employing any of the solutions that we already have.

It’s like, if you could get everyone to agree to listen to a computer, why not just skip the computer and get everyone to agree to listen to a combination of popular will and expert advice? Popular will and expert advice are like the supercomputer that runs society that we already have.

This article doesn’t really answer most of my questions.

What subjects does the AI cover? Do they do all their learning independently? Does AI compose the entire lesson plan? What is the software platform? Who developed it? Is this just an LLM or is there more to it? How are students assessed? How long has the school been around, and what is their reputation? What is the fundamental goal of their approach?

Overall, this sounds quite dumb. Just incredibly and transparently stupid. Like, if they insisted that all learning would be done on the blockchain. I’m very open minded, but I don’t understand what the student’s experience will be. Maybe they’ll learn in the same way one could learn by browsing Wikipedia for 7 hours a day. But will they enjoy it? Will it help them find career fulfillment, or build confidence or learn social skills? It just sounds so much like that Willie Wonka experience scam but applied to an expensive private school instead of a pop-up attraction.