Humanius

A million today may not be worth as much as a million 35 years ago, but a million still undeniably makes you wealthy even today. Heck… even 400k in 2025 would make you decently wealthy. You can live a quite comfortable life with that kind of money

I’m not exactly a fan of pretending that millionaires are somehow struggling, and if they don’t “feel wealthy” they should take a good hard look at the lives of people in the middle class or lower.

Edit: This all feels very similar to that claim I’ve been seeing going around recently that somehow an income of 100k per year would be a poverty wage, even though it’s twice the mean income of US housholds.

If you can’t make ends meet with 100k per month in income or one million in the bank, you might just need to spend a little less lavishly. Your life will still be comfortable, I promise.

Won’t someone think of the poor millionaires?

If you can’t have sex with the sex-machine making machine, what even is the point?

There is a difference between human-scale and humanoid.

Human-scale just means the robot needs to fit in a space where humans should also fit, while humanoid means it is supposed to resemble a humans not just in size, but also in shape. A humanoid robot would generally have a torso, two arms, two legs, and probably a head.

As an example, a roomba fits in a human environment but is not humanoid. You could hypothetically make a humanoid robot that is capable of using an ordinary vacuum to vacuum the same space, but it would be significantly more complex and more expensive to do that. A purpose-built roomba is a much more cost-effective solution for cleaning up after humans.

Given that it’s a humanoid robot, I suspect that this is more of a marketing stunt than any practical deployment of robots.

Humanoid robots don’t make a ton of sense in manufacturing. Why mimic the sub-optimal anatomy of a human when you can make your robotic work slave have any appendage you want, which are designed to be optinal for their task along the assembly line?

Humanoid robots mostly only make sense in spaces that need to be designed for humans (like homes or hospitals) where the robot needs to regularly interact with human infrastructure.

Hypothetically the police could come with a warrant and force you to hand over the footage you recorded. It’s a higher barrier than if footage is being uploaded to the cloud, but it can still happen.

And even if the cameras are not uploading their footage to the cloud, it still wouldn’t sit well with me if every other house has a camera pointed at the public street

Where I live it is technically illegal to record the public street with an automated camera, but it’s not really being enforced. So there is Ring cameras everywhere.

Yes, but it’ll take them another ten years

I’m no expert, but I believe this is down to the individual member states.

In my country (the NL) it is technically not allowed to film the public street with an automated camera, which effectively makes Ring and equivalents illegal to install in most places

Practically this is not really enforced though, so you see them everywhere anyway.

I’m not even remotely saying you should use Grokipedia over Wikipedia. I kind of assumed that would be a given, considering the other things I said.

I’m merely pointing out that an encyclopedia isn’t just stating dry facts, and that there is certain editorial decisions that need to be made when presenting information.

That does not mean I’m saying Wikipedia is bad and shouldn’t be used.

Edit: typo

While that is idealy true, the reality of maintaining an ecyclopedia is not always so black and white.

For example, Wikipedia needs to make decisions like whether to call Scientology a religion or a cult, or whether to call homeopathy medicin or pseudo-science. These are value judgements based on criticism to the subject matter and are not fully objective. But they are still important to allow people to get a full picture on a topic.

The alternative would be to relegate criticism on a topic to the criticism section, which runs the risks of giving certain ideas a false sense of legitimacy.

If I had to make a guess, part of the reason why Musk has such an issue with Wikipedia is because they actually have the policy to name criticism up front.

To my knowledge, there are designs which allow you to pop out the latch without the need for electronics.

However, if I’m reading the article correctly those wouldn’t be allowed either because in their default state they don’t have “enough room for a hand to grip behind them”. That wording alone explicitely bans flush doorhandles, and not just electronic doorhandles

To any disabled socialist dark-skinned autistic trans woman, my advice would be to not get a job on that Venezuelan fishing boat

The countries that oppose Chat Control are:

• Austria
• Belgium
• Czechia
• Finland
• Germany
• Luxemburg
• Netherlands
• Poland

Supporters are:

• Bulgaria
• Croatia
• Cyprus
• Denmark
• France
• Hungary
• Ireland
• Italy
• Latvia
• Lithuania
• Malta
• Portugal
• Slovakia
• Spain
• Sweden

All other countries are currently undecided

Source: https://fightchatcontrol.eu/

Contact your representatives and tell them they should oppose Chat Control. The link above lists who they are and provides some templates for emails you could send them

I’m at the “I’d like to ditch Windows, but whenever I try another Linux distro there are too many little issues really consider it a viable alternative” stage.

I’m opposed to the death penalty. There are various reasons why I believe the State should not be allowed to hold that power over people.

That said, if you are going to have the death penalty as part of your legal system, at least be honest about it. Don’t try to put lipstick on a pig by making it appear more civilized and ethical than it is.

Death penalty by firing squad is at least a very straight-forward and honest way of imposing the death penalty

All the more reason to download multiple copies

Funnily enough that is roughly the implementation the EU seems to be working on.

https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-age-verification

On a side-note. I do not consider the government to be a trusted party. Whatever solution gets implemented needs to not provide the government any information that they can use for mass surveillance.

The two main requirements in my view are:

• The website that needs your age shouldn’t get to know your identity. They only get to verify your age.
• The government age verification shouldn’t get to know what service you are requesting access for. They only provide age verification.

Edit: You mention the certificate being short-lived, but one of the concerns mentioned in the proposed implementation for the EU age verification states that if that window is too short it can be used to determine identity.

While I agree that the cost of operation and yield are a valid concern, the same argument could have been used against renewable energies like wind and solar only 30 to 40 years ago.

The price of these energy sources has come down a lot since, for a large part thanks to the modern day widespread use. We have a lot of experience generating power this way which drives down cost, and increases yield.

Novel techniques like the one described in the article don’t yet benefit from that experience and scale. And if we don’t try new things every now and then they never will.

That is not to say all novel techniques will be equally fruitful, but if you don’t occasionally try new things you will never learn.

Edit: Misspelled “energy” as “energie”

I’m currently using Ecosia as well, because they are working together with Qwant on a European search index. I want to support that.

Republic and democracy are not mutually exclusive…