Comment Just Imagine (Score 1) 16
Every education bureaucrat in the country hungrily kneading their hands as they make plans to fire every teacher and replace them with a screen.
Hey wait, I think we've seen that somewhere before, haven't we?
Every education bureaucrat in the country hungrily kneading their hands as they make plans to fire every teacher and replace them with a screen.
Hey wait, I think we've seen that somewhere before, haven't we?
We are in a post-employment society. The world of jobs and resumes and all the associated bullshit is obsolete. Students should be equipped to leave it behind.
For openers, any student who doesn't want to go to school any more should be allowed to drop out. That will solve half the problem right there.
Those that remain should be allowed to choose what they want to study. The only three mandatory subjects should be reading, basic arithmetic and civics.
Third, curricula should be updated to reflect subjects relevant to the 21st century like finance and accounting, computers, entrepreneurship, journalism and how to use a library for research.
There should also be a trade track for things like carpentry, farming, plumbing, machine/auto shop, etc.
Students who actually want to do the work don't cheat.
Ideally at least half the students that graduate should be equipped to start their own business. Problem solved.
Turns out people take out mortgages and have children. They have car payments and insurance and *cough* grocery bills. Clothes, furniture, yard care. They put down roots and would like to raise a family.
My parents had that. In fact they made it all the way through the 70s without a single layoff.
When do we get to that part?
It used to be the technology press would really spend some time and effort looking into new ideas.
Now they hiss like a diseased alley cat and growl "oh how I hate you."
If you're halfway skilled and not a dick, why did they lay you off in the first place?
The Slashdot crowd, along with Reddit and pretty much any other 20 or 30-something on the Internet will fight to the last EBT card to prevent solid career-track jobs from emerging anywhere a U.S. citizen can get at them.
Any attempt the U.S. makes at being competitive will also be categorically opposed, including tariffs, education programs, job fairs or startups.
It's not about the economics. Where the chips are made is irrelevant. There's another agenda at work.
This is a law that will allow the federal government to take total control of AI forever, and will further allow them to take control of all creative work forever, which will essentially repeal the First Amendment.
It will proceed thusly: as of now, the presumption is that all work is created by people. This will give way to suspicion that all work is created by AI, which will lead to "approved" and "not approved" works, which will lead to "this work is presumed to have been created by AI but your papers are not in order and it may not be published." *poof* All creative work is presumptively banned. No more First Amendment.
Meanwhile, ex post facto laws are unconstitutional under Article I Section 9.
Have a nice day.
If you sell a copyrighted work, you are infringing on the copyright holder's exclusive rights to distribution. Further, willful infringement for financial gain can be considered a criminal offense under 17 U.S.C. 506
The counterpoint to that is Pixar. They had an unbroken string of megahits from 1995 until Brave in 2012. Since then Pixar has been a complete disaster.
You can almost pinpoint the exact moment in Brave when the executive committee overruled Brenda Chapman and destroyed the characters and the film. That methodology reached its peak when Disney deliberately threw a two-time Academy Award winning director under the bus and lit a quarter billion shareholder dollars on fire because Bob Iger didn't like Dick Cook.
They almost set the table for a bankruptcy when Eisner did the same thing to Jeffrey Katzenberg.
There's no substitute for talent. Dollars can't imitate it. Computers can't imitate it. Overpaid executives and office politics can't imitate it. Either you hire a writer who knows what the hell they are doing or you go to zero.
Please click.
Twenty years ago, they hired writers.
See, the Internet, e.g. the teenage punkass committee, convinced show business execs that writing wasn't a real skill. It didn't require any talent or education. Unlike engineering or being a science man.
It's not a real major. Art and writing are just playing with crayons, you see.
For a clue on how that worked out, take a look at the last half-dozen Disney scripts. Refusing to hire good writers cost their shareholders $172 billion in just under four years.
That's what good writing is worth, scientifically speaking, of course.
That will still complain about missing drivers and dlls.
This after 30+ years of PCs that can be almost completely disabled by unlinking a font.
I'll pass.
Unless you're in your 70s, you're a lying sack of shit [blogspot.com].
Son, I wrote and published one of the first 15,000 web sites. I uploaded it through twisted copper from a machine with 4MB of RAM. I've written production code on every enterprise platform invented since 1975. I've forgotten more about computers and networking than you'll ever know. Don't lecture me.
By the way, if you're trying to assert your technology knowledge, linking "blogspot" is not the best option.
The number of man-hours funded in the private sector vs. government man-hours for the Internet is a ratio so small we need a goddamn electron microscope to measure it. I've been programming since Gerald Ford was president. You don't have any fucking clue what the hell you're talking about.
like the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 which threw another $1B at it
Chickenshit money. By the time that investment made it to the field I was working for a company that could have written a check and bought the Internet, wires, servers and power strips with what they were spending on infrastructure every quarter.
I don't, and neither do you, because the contract was only for $93 million. Fuck man, even Glenn Beck debunked that claim at the time. When Glenn Beck thinks you're wrong, that's something truly exceptional.
Oh dear GOD! The government came up with a bullshit number after everyone threw a fit over the first bullshit number?? The government would NEVER do THAT!
Even if it was $93 million or whatever the hell, give me three motivated college students, a box of pencils and a million dollars I could have coded that site over a weekend.
Bottom line here is you don't have the first clue what you're talking about. Meanwhile, I'm starting to hear off-the-rack propeller-head memes from Reddit, so I'm going to excuse myself.
Maybe because just about everyone who isn't deliberately being ignant recognizes that trying to run a fully industrialized and computerized 21st century society based on a document from a late 18th century agrarian society and nothing else is insane?
Oh I see. So what date would you consider the proper cutoff? Before what date can we say "everything prior to this is insane so we can ignore it?" How about 1940? That gives us about 80 years of modern advancement. Oh sure, we lose two states and six constitutional amendments but at least we're not being insane.
If Congress believes their powers are too antiquated to deal with modern life, they can propose an amendment to the states for ratification. And if the states say no, the answer is no. That's called following the law, which despite having originated before 1940, is still the correct way to do things.
Congress has the explicit authority to do make the laws needed to do their job.
Fine. Then if Congress has unlimited power, they can repeal the Constitution, grant themselves prima nocta and find some new brides to fuck. Gotta pick a lane. Either we are a nation of laws or we are a nation of subjects.
So what are the "foregoing powers?
They're listed in Article I, Section 8.
general welfare of the nation.
Delivering wads of cash to some random non-profit organization does not fit that description.
It is unarguably in the nation's interest - its general welfare - to decouple our energy needs from international market influences for the sake of our independence and national security
The same argument can be made for any pretended crisis. Congress already has the power to "decouple" our energy needs from international markets because they control all trade with international markets through their Article I powers.
The federal government has the legal authority to invest in clean energy in exactly the same way it had the authority to invest in literally everything else.
Such authority is not granted anywhere in the Constitution. Therefore it is forbidden by the Tenth Amendment.
because the federal government invested heavily in all that shit and you wouldn't want to be a hypocrite, would you?
I helped build the Internet, Tubby. I know its history backwards and forwards. The federal government played a minimal role, if that.
Remember the $600 million health care web site that didn't work? That's what the Internet would be if the federal government were in charge.
Even the people who wrote the constitution understood that the world would change and included mechanisms to expand and evolve both the Constitution itself and the laws that apply it.
If the federal government thinks it needs the power to "invest in clean energy" they can propose an amendment and put it to the states. Until then, they are breaking the law. Case closed.
Bet you're super pissed about the 16th amendment too lol
I'll bet you were super pissed when Eisenhower outlawed communism.
He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion
