Society must acknowledge that sharing of info should be encouraged, and be thankful that technology has made sharing incredibly easy. Need to work harder on systems that can fairly compensate producers while encouraging sharing, not continue to base compensation on the restriction of sharing. Especially not to the point of outlawing sharing and wasting resources enforcing that and causing still more waste of lives that have to spend ruinously to fight to defend themselves from the legal mess.

One thing that makes this issue most intractable is that the organs who report on it are thoroughly convinced that sharing is contrary to their own interests. How is the public to hear unbiased reporting on this matter when no one with a metaphorical megaphone will give one?

the hunger by the 1% to remove as much humanity from the workplace is sickening.

they fully know they are destroying the middle and lower classes (even more than they already have).

they, like the R party, just dont care. they think they are rich and insulated enough. they never cared what their own people need. the 'let them eat cake' time has come back again, but even worse.

there will be no thought to social systems needed to support the unemployed (which will be many of us, given enough time).

I'm glad I'm retiring soon. I would not want to compete in a job market that bosses think can be done by computer, alone.

and I would not want to be the 'prompt meister' to try to coax answers from the machines that make sense.

some see a great future with AI. I see nothing but doom and gloom. the greed factor is strong in humans and the class disparity will cause rioting and civil wars.

maybe not wars. the US has created a special police force that is above the law, so any uprisings will EASILY be dealt with. they thought about that. ICE is not just for foreigners. its a general purpose police force answerable only to 1 person.

people, please show me I'm wrong. but all signs point to a very bad future for 95% of the 'thinks for a living' workforce.

If you have a "diverse" group than an inherent part of diversity is that some of the group will disagree with diversity and even be hostile to the greater good of the group.
There are many who perceive countries that welcome immigrants to be gullible idiots that they can take advantage of, and will take advantage while it's beneficial to them and then quickly abandon that country if it's no longer to their advantage.

So you can only benefit from limited diversity, the members of the group must still have common goals and values otherwise they'll be detrimental to the group as a whole.

Well, I'm about to find out if I need to do my first chargeback, I have a delayed response on a return authorization for where I was sent the wrong item. They advertised a different version. This might be confusing for them since the difference is small - yet critical. But there really should be no confusion because they advertised the other version both in the images and the product name/listing title.

They have been having decreases in their ability to grow food, so yes they absolutely want Ukraine. You really think people around here know dick.

I have overly expensive cable internet already, I don't need to also pay for CATV.

I got a Google TV because I knew it would have the best app support. Looks like you didn't.

My desktop TV-used-as-Monitor has stupid LG WebOS, but I also don't need a TV-specific app since my desktop is connected to it and I don't connect the TV to the network, only HDMI.

Most iPhone owners didn't buy them outright.

World trade was headed to destruction. Now it's just heading there a bit quicker.

Because that will not pacify the poor. Printing money constantly will cause monetary inflation, so only the rich will be able to buy anything of significant value like homes. You'd have to also give away housing. It makes much more sense just to take the money from the rich and give it to the poor, the rich will end up with it again anyway.

It's not wrong to say that America is largely at fault. We got Ukraine to give up nukes in exchange for vague and non-binding promises that we would protect them from Russia. Obviously this is a deal they should not have taken, but it was our sleazy idea.

I buy from AliExpress all the time. (Same business, different storefront.) As a rule they are roughly as responsive as Amazon. Shipping takes longer but prices are much better. Pretty much all the cheap crap on Amazon comes from them and it's much cheaper from the source. So far they have processed all of my complaints gracefully.

I agree that's the main problem in this context, but there are other large ones of course. The nuclear isn't just a problem in construction, it's also a problem in maintenance, and in decommissioning. Nuclear is also not cheaper than fossil fuels if you consider full lifecycle costs of operation. You might say it's cheaper because it's possible to contain the waste and that's not possible for fossil fuels, but fossil fuels shouldn't actually even be in the running.

Only if the money slated for nuclear is diverted to sources which make sense like wind and solar, which even when paired with batteries are now cheaper than coal, let alone nuclear.

We know it weakly interacts electromagnetically, which means one of the ways in which it is posited planets form, initially via electrostatic attraction of dust particles, isn't likely to work. This means dark matter will be less "clumpy" and more diffuse, and less likely to create denser conglomerations that could lead to stellar and planetary formation.

What this finding does suggest, if it holds true, is that some form of supersymmetry, as an extension fo the Standard Model is true. Experiments over the last 10-15 years have heavily constrained the masses and energy levels of any supersymmetry model, so it would appear that if this is the case, it's going to require returning to a model that some physicists had started to abandon.