Jiggle_Physics
@Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works
- Comment on Anyone else from Europe feels the same while browsing the "All" feed? 1 week ago:
Yeah, with a few exceptions, if you are in Europe you can likely look at our new media and be like “Ha, well, at least I am not there”
- Comment on Iron 1 week ago:
I do not believe that stripping them of IP rights can go off without disrupting the system in place. I am not saying we should never do anything again. I am saying we are going to have to shift ownership from the private entity, to the public. This will cause a lot of corporations to shut down, leave industries, etc. They will also use their ability to manipulate vital technologies, like drugs, and dialysis, etc., to cause pain in order to scare people into compliance with them. The longer we wait to stop them from owning everything, the more catastrophic this change could be.
- Comment on Iron 1 week ago:
That is also not what I said. Like, it is almost the opposite of my argument.
- Comment on Iron 1 week ago:
No, that is not what I am hearing, I am hearing “we should change IP law, but not if it interrupts development/production of medical tech”
- Comment on Iron 1 week ago:
So where is the threshold? Also, you are talking to someone who is likely to die from the government’s recent bill stopping the supply of medicine, and other treatment, I will need. This is the result of private ownership of the medicines, and machines, needed to deal with this, and their power to affect the government. So I am currently in the situation I propose will happen, in a much larger manner, in the future as these technologies develop, and society becomes more intertwined with it. So, where is the threshold were we stop this, and change our laws on owning ideas? I propose that we crossed it some time ago, and this shift into IP law is long over due. I would rather get this done earlier, rather than later, because the only thing that will happen is this dependency will grow. Your appeal to emotion with your anecdote about your diabetic will only worsen the type of situation I find myself in, as society becomes more dependent on the tech. The longer we wait the more catastrophic it will become due to pussy-footing around, and kicking the can down the road, as people don’t want to make hard decisions.
- Comment on Iron 1 week ago:
Tell me, what exactly is the threshold where a private entity owning society directing technology crosses to where it should no longer have that control over it? Define when allowing technology to be privately owned goes from where we are, to “oh shit, they already have complete control”? Because I would prefer to restructure how ownership of ideas works before we have to destroy society in order to course correct.
- Comment on Iron 2 weeks ago:
yes, I have been trying to express that what we have at the moment is not so much the problem as the advancement and what is to come. I am also not saying that we should not do these things, I am saying when do do them we must not allow it be controlled, via IP ownership, or otherwise, by a private entity. As things stand the medical industry holds far too much sway with their ownership of things people need to live, or live well. They are also actively working against social medicine, with a current focus on the UK, and a variety of developing nations. They should not be afforded the power imbalance such ownership allows them now, and as things like this progress, it will only make that power imbalance worse. Every technology is a double edged sword, and the more one affects society the more we need to prevent the cutting edged aimed at us. I could not dare to guess the ways in which we could be impacted by future technology, much how people in the 90s could not have envisioned the societal issues that are arising now, such as the loneliness epidemic, and the structural loss of actual ownership, or any rights to anything we have. Sure we had a pretty good guess that propaganda would run wild, and it has, but many other things that have huge impacts are things no one was thinking about even 20 years ago.
- Comment on Iron 2 weeks ago:
No, because very advanced levels of genetic engineering are unlike anything we historically have done, as is automation that basically replaces all human as the general work force. They are not apples to apples comparable.
- Comment on Iron 2 weeks ago:
this is great if the IP holder continues wanting to play ball with socialized medicine
- Comment on Iron 2 weeks ago:
the cost. everyone gets everything, no stratified application. The only way to keep genetically engineered casts from developing due to this would be if everyone gets it. Similar thing with very advanced automation. Once the technology hits a certain point ownership has to be shifted to the public at large. If some ownership, and others don’t, for whatever reason, these technologies make a gap in power hitherto unknown. If the billionaire class exert outsized influence due to their resources now, then being able to simply decide how genetic engineering is used, or to own the machines that create almost all of our production, they will simply just be the god kings of an advanced tech era.
These types of things need to be completely socialized, no owners, no IP holders, no cost gates, etc.
- Comment on Iron 2 weeks ago:
We need to make genetic modification something that isn’t gate kept by the rich. You might not think that horror scenarios where you will be genetically engineered to operate in a determined class/occupation, are possible, or probable, but I do. Without having some sort of regulation forcing genetic engineering to be universally available to everyone, with no exceptions, I see this being a very strong risk for the long term.
- Comment on Iron 2 weeks ago:
Yeah, you get the older, less advanced, gene editing tools, while the rich maintain their lock into the cutting edge. The new marker will be a combination of age and generation of genetic tech applied. This is also considering that it will be a broad application of the tech that is available to the lower classes, not just things that make them better soldiers and laborers.
- Comment on Iron 2 weeks ago:
I think GATTACA is more a warning that gene editing will become a luxury of the wealthy, and inherently will be elitist, with no realistic way to separate the two. It will just become the new rich and connected qualifier, doesn’t matter the actual capacities of the people, the one with the money, and connections, will be much more likely to get the thing.
- Comment on Iron 2 weeks ago:
I mean, meth is already a powerful aphrodisiac
- Comment on What are some games with absolutely fantastic soundtracks? 2 weeks ago:
- Comment on Mastercard release a statement about game stores, payment processors and adult content 2 weeks ago:
Silicon Valley used to call the founding staff of PayPal the PayPal Mafia
- Comment on Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users. 3 weeks ago:
Agreed.
- Comment on Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users. 3 weeks ago:
For me it is no harder to read, it’s more like people sprinkling in Shakespearean English to their normal speech, it just comes off as either being pretentious, or random xd
- Comment on Lemmy is a tech literate echo chamber 3 weeks ago:
do you know the proportion of people making those tools? Like how many people could make tools, and work a technically skilled trade, compared to those who didn’t. Also, if you have a very narrow set of things you need to make, it doesn’t really do a whole lot more inherently. To see this before computers computers, just look at cars. Once they became mainstream you started to see that most people had no clue how they worked, and no interest in knowing.
My grandmother’s generation of my family were largely farmers. Like mostly born between 1910 and 1923. They knew how to make, and fix, tools, fences, etc. However, once they got away from this specific knowledge, that they grew up with, they were completely disinterested, and were suspicious of people who had broader knowledge sets. They also thought learning from reading was pointless, as they never were interested in reading, so they developed their reading skills to be just enough to get by, and became intensely frustrated when they ran into an issue, on the farm, they hadn’t before, and needed to read the manual for whatever piece of equipment it was. They also did this thing, where they would be doing something, like repairing/installing/expanding their irrigation system, but they didn’t have a fundamental understanding of why it worked. Just that you did these things, in this way, and it would work. They also didn’t care why it worked, just that it did.
- Comment on This is why brexit happened 3 weeks ago:
- Comment on This is why brexit happened 3 weeks ago:
chaos reigns?
- Comment on I explained economics to my nine year old 3 weeks ago:
macro economics is astrology for MBA bros
- Comment on The Age-Checked Internet Has Arrived 3 weeks ago:
There is a long history of proposed bills, and other legal maneuvers, to require ID for things like age verification, and other purposes, from around the world, dating back to the 90s. When COPPA was in the proposal state there was tons of discussion about ID requirements, it was ultimately struck down, but the conversation was being had.
I can remember this being discussed on CSPAN back when I was in high school, in the 90s.
- Comment on As White House Touts 'Economic Boom,' Americans Say They're Barely Scraping By 3 weeks ago:
Not delusional, the people who matter to them are generally doing quite well, so the economy is doing well. Just like the gilded age, where the “economic boom” funneled truck loads of money into the coffers of the vanderbilts, carnegies, clarks, melons, etc., while the average person was struggling under terrible life conditions.
- Comment on We wouldn’t need the Epstein files to prove DJT’s guilt if society just trusted women in the first place. 3 weeks ago:
That is a whole different issue than what was said by the previous person, who said the idea behind believe women is for authority figures to take their allegations seriously and do their jobs properly, and investigate the claims. It was not mocking as, in the context of what the previous poster said, and not the expanded issues of the system beyond the scope of this, it would take something like psychic knowledge, or some impractical expectation of humanity.
- Comment on We wouldn’t need the Epstein files to prove DJT’s guilt if society just trusted women in the first place. 3 weeks ago:
What way is better than investigating allegations impartially? Do you know of something better that wouldn’t require someone to be psychic, or require everyone coming to some nigh impossible position where no one lies?
- Comment on Dik Piks 5 weeks ago:
over the many years I have been online, I have received 100s of unsolicited dick picks. I am a guy, and straight. meh, just letting me know to block them I guess.
- Comment on Grandma is on her own 5 weeks ago:
I have been trying to get a good grasp on how many people own second homes, and there seems to be some real uncertainty about this. About 6% of homes in the US are not the first deed to a home a person, or couple, owns. However, upwards of 40% of people report owning a second home. We aren’t really sure what is going on here. Clearly 40% of the population do not own more than one home, and considering that the really wealthy often own 5+ houses, there is just no way. However that doesn’t mean that there aren’t some problems with the data collection on how many homes are owned by people on multiple deeds.
From what I have found seems the most thrown around estimate is somewhere around 7-8% of homes are owned by people who own other homes, and that group like makes up around 8-10% of the population. But who knows, there are many people who are on deeds, but don’t truly own the home, and them being on it is a security/convenience measure. Bleh.
- Comment on PieFed.World is now open 1 month ago:
Just another way of entering these federated online spaces
- Comment on I can fix her 1 month ago:
living on the edge, a place you can easily fall to your death, but it is exhilarating to be there