They'd be better typists. And while at it, put arms on top of heads and eyes on the back. You'd be the best basket-baller out there. And give them 3 wankers to compensative for all the jokes classmates will make about them.

Big co's spend a lot of lobbying and bribe money to rid competition. It's more cost effective than doing a better job.

> Ford made the Ford Ranger EV 1998 to 2002

It seemed designed as mostly a company fleet vehicle, not a consumer vehicle. If there is a lot of wait time between deliveries, then you don't need big/efficient batteries. For example, for repairs, the average onsite repair may take two hours. The EV doesn't have to use batteries during that two hours.

Many believe it's a reinforcement mechanism between flowering plants and insects. Once both plants and insects got into the symbiosis pattern, it flowered (pun half intended) as both sides gained a big advantage: one was able to disperse its DNA further, and the other got an easy meal.

Why nature didn't invent it earlier is hard to say. Maybe because most insects have crappy eyesight. One then happened to have good-enough eyesight that they could spot flowers at a distance, and evolution improved both bug eyes and flowers after that.

I feel like the auto-makers trying to jump on the EV bandwagon arrogantly assumed, "Tesla is just a n00b at auto manufacturing. We've got over 100 years of experience. As soon as we step into this game, it's all over for them and the rest of the Johnny-Come-Lately brands trying to sell people electric cars!"

They didn't take into account a VERY important factor. Tesla established itself as a "premium/luxury" vehicle pretty quickly. The combination of the instant torque and industry-leading 0-60MPH times, plus advanced tech like the "Autopilot" functionality, not to mention the huge touch-screen panel/infotainment system that was miles ahead of everyone else.. and then the subsequent build-out of the large supercharger network world-wide meant people would pay as much as 6 figures for one of these vehicles, gladly.

All this stuff was AMAZING back in the 2012-2016 time-frame, when traditional auto-makers only dabbled in EVs by essentially tossing a battery pack and motor in an existing vehicle, winding up with poor range and no big advantage for the buyer.

At this point in time? Early adopters of EVs are through. They're just another mainstream option, now. So companies like Ford were fools to expect good sales of anything priced like Tesla asked for a Model S or X. They made vehicles like the Mach-E assuming they'd be profitable asking that kind of money for one. But this is 2024, where people who had that kind of money for an EV already spent it on their Tesla -- and everyone else is only interested in an EV to save money on total cost of ownership. If the car costs 2-3x more than they can get a decent, reliable gas powered one, the ROI isn't there.

Indeed! AI can certainly replace lousy human service because it's hard to suck more than the existing batch. Many service desks are just outsourced India call centers who service hundreds of companies, pretending to be dedicated, and know very little about each co's products; they just follow scripts. They are already de-facto bots.

AI is not near ready to replace competent experienced human service desks, but those are too rare anyhow, unfortunately.

Indeed. QEMM was something of a hero in that department, but even memmaker was enormously helpful...

Every major shift WAS different from the one before.

What's DOUBLY different about this time is that this time we are not moving from skill to skill, we are moving from unskilled to something.

I truly despise the idea that there are no unskilled jobs because it is not just false, it's a counterproductive argument. All of us who have worked a variety of jobs know that some jobs require both talent and education, and others require mostly just a pulse and respiration. But people who work both kinds of jobs have essentially the same needs.

The lack of clear English isnâ(TM)t the frustrating thing with modern day customer "service". I have lived in non-English speaking locales and can roll with a language barrier. The problem is outsourced customer "service" ain't empowered to do a damn thing except read from a script and by the time I'm frustrated enough to make a call it's invariably for a problem too complicated to solve with a script. AI will not fix this problem. It will just leave you yelling at a disempowered computer rather than a disempowered human being. The solution to this problem would require the C-Suite thinking of customer service as SERVICE rather than a pointless expense to be minimized.

They are new at it. You don't get great overnight.

Which word did you find unclear? I don't remember stuttering.

Not all abuse is physical, and women have basically the entire government (men with guns) at their disposal to meet out abuse if a relationship turns sour, if they so choose.
I've known men who have had their lives and future prospects ruined by their former mates: family courts are overwhelmingly overseen by female judges, often from (literal) feminist schools of thought. It sometimes results in overly burdensome alimony, child support payments that supports a lavish non-working lifestyle for the former wife (in one case whom rotated through multiple lovers / sugar daddies) and does not go towards raising the children--to the point where the former husband is basically living monastically / on the brink of homelessness. Alimony cannot be discharged under bankruptcy. Primary custody almost always goes towards the woman, regardless of her actual ability to raise a well adjusted child. The justice system as a whole is radically slanted towards favoring the female partner and will default to her story despite any number of insane / impossible tales.

Of course, like the economy and everything else, this has a cooling effect on men's attitudes towards raising a family.

Hiding from the truth doesn't change it.

This is different in that the software will take the service jobs, and it's the same in that the people profiting from the switch don't give a fuck about you.

It's also true that those people have names and addresses, and we have lumber.

That was the joke alright, he doesn't think any of the action against Apple makes sense because he's in favor of anticompetitive behavior at the expense of customers for some sick reason, probably cognitive dissonance.

That's fine if you have an embarrassingly parallel problem which doesn't require a lot of data transfer between processors. There are jobs like that, of course, but those mac minis have pretty poor connectivity and having that many nodes means doing a lot of extra work to set up and maintain them. The EPYC processor (and to a lesser extent the Xeon) also offers very good price:performance. The minis come with a lot of extra case material that you have to pay for (including making it pretty) but don't really want.