So I was using telling Trump kind of broadly. What they would actually be doing is calling the senators they own and telling them to sit down with Trump and explain that if he doesn't back the fuck down he's going to lose his War Powers. And if he keeps up at it they will have the senators they own impeach him and remove him from office after the midterms.

Remember the Trump isn't actually in charge the billionaires are. So if this is happening it's because the billionaires want it to.

I'm sure that the various other AI companies will respect the copyrights involved and not steal all the useful information and ideas and algorithms. If it's one group of people who are always very respectful of copyright it's AI companies.

The trouble is the only place to dump it that much money involved is into your 401k. So it's only a matter of time.

There will be an initial gold rush by Insiders. And then the regulations will quietly be altered. Just in time to let them screw us all over and make out with all our money.

ED: "But it doesn't work for gravity with linear curvature"

Relativity = gravity is represented by the curvature of spacetime. Curvature is linear, R. The formula treats curvature linearly. As things get closer and curvature spikes, the math just scales at a 1:1 rate

Quadratic gravity = Squares the curvature. Doesn't really change things much when everything is far apart, but heavily changes things when everything is close together.

Pros: prevents infinities and other problems when trying to reconcile quantum theory with relativity ("makes the theory renormalizable"). E.g. you don't want to calculate "if I add up the probabilities of all of these possible routes to some specific event, what are the odds that it happens?" -> "Infinity percent odds". That's... a problem. Renormalization is a trick for electromagnetism that prevents this by letting the infinities cancel out. But it doesn't work with linear curvature - gravitons carry energy, which creates gravity, which carries more energy... it explodes, and renormalization attempts just create new infinities. But it does work with quadratic curvature - it weakens high-energy interactions and allows for convergence.

Cons: Creates "ghosts" (particles with negative energies or negative probabilities, which create their own problems). There's various proposed solutions, but none that's really a "eureka!" moment. Generally along the lines of "they exist but are purely virtual and don't interact", "they exist but they're so massive that they decay before they can interact with the universe", "they don't exist, we're just using the math out of bounds and need a different representation of the same", "If we don't stop at R^2 but also add in R^3, R^4, ... on to infinity, then they go away". Etc.

The theory isn't new, BTW. The idea is from 1918 (just a few years after Einstein's theory of General Relativity was published), and the work that led to the "Pros" above is from 1977.

Did you get paid to post that? If not then you should be.

We stopped and forcing antitrust law in the '80s. If you try to make a serious go at competing with any major company then they will come in and if you are extremely lucky off of the buy you out but these days they just come in and copy your product and do it cheaper by leveraging other businesses they own and run you out of business.

As a employee you're also fucked because we also stopped and forcing labor protection laws. So companies can collude to lower wages while getting tax breaks for offshoring your job.

The game is rigged against you. But that's a really hard thing for people to accept.

Is so good for the billionaires that they don't care that America is rapidly getting shut out of the rest of the world because we are a national security risk...

Ordinarily what would be happening right now is billionaires would be telling Trump to knock it the fuck off with the crazy foreign policy because of the risk of us companies being frozen out of European markets. But nope. Everybody is just full steam ahead on the Trump train.

It's another example of how every single system designed to protect you has broken down.

Of bad stock into your 401k. The YouTuber Patrick Boyle has a detailed video on the subject.

Basically SpaceX is going to be valued at 1.5 trillion. However it is impossible for it to reach that valuation in the real world.

SpaceX already has all the launch customers that can possibly get even under the best case scenario. And in unfavorable administration would almost certainly start looking for alternatives because Elon meddled in a war.

So the only possible growth sector for SpaceX is launching its own satellites, specifically the ones for internet.

But that's a dead end too because there aren't enough customers who can afford high-speed internet and also do not have access to some form of landline based internet like cable or DSL

the only other growth sector would be AI bullshit but Elon has lost most of his engineers to other companies. SpaceX got this huge boost because Elon had a mystique and he was talking about going to Mars so a shitload of rocket engineers took lower pay than they could get in any other job and work longer hours to work for spacex. That isn't happening with elon's AI companies. So he can't compete and the stuff he's building is barely better than what you could build yourself and run off your own GPU.

Everybody knows this, at least everybody who is investing that kind of money, so in order to get the kind of money he wants he's doing a weird stock scheme that limits access to the stock in order to drive up the price. Basically a few insiders will get all the profit and it's going to leave a huge amount of worthless stock that needs to be sent somewhere.

Normally it would be dumped into public pensions but those have been maxed out with bad stock already. So we are 401K is going to get hammered.

This is just the largest of many scams that are going to loot your retirement and there's basically nothing you can do about it except vote for pro-consumer politicians who want to regulate Wall Street but that's going to be annoying people like Elizabeth Warren and AOC and Bernie Sanders and frankly people don't like them... And in politics likeability is basically everything now.

What I'm saying is that if you are retiring or even if you're just retired you're a fucked. You have money and somebody wants it and they're going to get it

A bit more about the latter. Beyond organophosphates, the main other alternative is pyrethroids. These are highly toxic to aquatic life, and they're contact poisons to pollinators just landing on the surface (some anti-insect clothing is soaked in pyrethrin for its effect). Also, neonicotinoids are often applied as seed coatings (which are taken up and spread through the plant), which primarily just affect the plant itself. Alternatives are commonly foliar sprays. This means drift to non-target impacts as well, such as in your shelterbelts, private gardens, neighbors' homes, etc. You also have to use far higher total pesticide quantities with foliar sprays instead of systematics, which not only drift, but also wash off, etc. Neonicotinoids can impact floral visitors, with adverse sublethal impacts but e.g. large pyrethroid sprayings can cause massive immediate fatal knockdown events of whole populations of pollinators.

Regrettable substitution is a real thing. We need to factor it in better. And that applies to nanoplastics as well.

In this case it would be easy enough to calculate how much anything would be off and then use the existing data.

Remember we're not talking about science here we're talking about public policy. So yeah the scientists can go ahead and redo all the experiments just to confirm the numbers and that's something scientists will want to do.

But we're not going to find all of a sudden that micro plastics are good for you. Neither are we going to find that they are in such low quantities that they aren't harmful. At best this is going to slightly skew the results.

But this isn't like radiometric dating where there are are all sorts of caveats because of how that science works. At the end of the day you've still got a brain full of plastic it's just potentially slightly less plastic.

But as usual just like when cigarettes were discovered to be killing people the plastic industry is going to hammer us with stories about this and slow down and the attempt at reform for at least another 50 years. And just like the cigarette industry, assuming our civilization survives what's happening right now that is, our grandchildren and great-grandchildren are going to look back at this time and say what the fuck was wrong with those people?

So, when we say microplastics, we really mainly mean nanoplastics - the stuff made from, say, drinking hot liquids from low-melting-point plastic containers. And yeah, they very much look like a problem. The strongest evidence is for cardiovascular disease. The 2024 NEJM study for example found that for patients with above-threshold levels of nanoplastics in cartoid artery plaque were 4,5x more likely to suffer from a heart attack. Neurologically, they cross the brain-blood barrier (and quite quickly). A 2023 study found that they cause alpha-synuclein to misfold and clump together, a halmark of Parkinsons and various kinds of dementia. broadly, they're associated with oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, protein aggregation, and neurotransmitter alterations. Oxidative stress is due to cells struggling to break down nanoplastics in them. They're also associated with immunotoxicity, inflammatory bowel disease, and reproductive dysfunction, including elevating inflammatory markers, impairing sperm quality, and modulating the tumor microenvironment. With respect to reproduction, they're also associated with epigenetic dysregulation, which can lead to heritable changes.

And here's one of the things that get me - and let me briefly switch to a different topic before looping back. All over, there's a rush to ban polycarbonate due to concerns over a degradation product (bisphenol-A), because it's (very weakly) estrogenic. But typical effective estrogenic activity from typical levels of bisphenol-A are orders of magnitude lower than that of phytoestrogens in food and supplements; bisphenol-A is just too rare to exert much impact. Phytoestrogens have way better PR than bisphenol-A, and people spend money buying products specifically to consume more of them. Some arguments against bisphenol-A focus on what type of estrogenic activity it can promote (more proliferative activity), but that falls apart given that different phytoestrogens span the whole gamut of types of activation. Earlier research arguing for an association with estrogen-linked cancer seems to have fallen apart in more recent studies. It does seem associated with PCOS, but it's hard to describe it as a causal association, because PCOS is associated with all sorts of things, including diet (which could change the exposure rate vs. non-PCOS populations) and significant hormonal changes (which could change the clearance rate of bisphenol-A vs. non-PCOS populations). In short, bisphenol-A from polycarbonate is not without concern, but the concern level seems like it should be much lower than with nanoplastics.

Why bring this up? Because polycarbonate is a low-nanoplastic-emitting material. It is a quite resilient, heat tolerant plastic, and thus - being much further from its glass transition temperature - is not particularly prone to shedding nanoplastics. By contrast, its replacements - polyethylene, polypropylene, polyethylene terephthate, etc - are highly associated with nanoplastic release, particularly with hot liquids. So by banning polycarbonate, we increase our exposure to nanoplastics, which are much better associated with actual harms. And unlike bisphenol-A, which is rapidly eliminated from the body, nanoplastics persist. You can't get rid of them. If some big harm is discovered with bisphenol-A that suddenly makes the risk picture seem much bigger than with nanoplastics, we can then just stop using it, and any further harm is gone. But we can't do that with nanoplastics.

People seriously need to think more about substitution risks when banning products. The EU in particular is bad about not considering it. Like, banning neonicotinoids and causing their replacement by organophosphates, etc isn't exactly some giant win. Whether it's a benefit to pollinators at all is very much up in the air, while it's almost certain that the substitution is more harmful for mammals such as ourselves (neonicotinoids have very low mammalian toxicity, unlike e.g. organophosphates, which are closely related to nerve agents).

tl;dr - research before you buy.

For people reading this thread. I'd recommend searching online about how well the suspend-resume works on Linux for the laptop model(s) you are interested in purchasing. Also worth looking into issues with very short battery life while in Linux. Because a lot of the power management ends up buried in some OEM options for the chipset windows drivers rather than properly expressed in the BIOS/UEFI.

About losing those lawsuits. They can absorb the fines and work around them. After a little bit of finagling the dollar amounts involved will not be terribly large. But on the other hand, and they have called this out in their sec filings, this basically makes it borderline impossible for any competitor to go up against them. In the long run it's probably going to save them money because traditionally the way they survive is by buying up whichever competitor of theirs the kids under 15 flocked to in order to find a place their parents didn't hang out

It's like how Microsoft lost their antitrust trial and the "punishment" was to give away millions of dollars of software to schools which they had been trying to get to take their software for 20 years...

I don't know what the opposite of a pyrrhic victory but I believe we've found it.

You will find that every single one of those age gate laws was written by a lobbying firm tied to Facebook.

There is no question that the age restriction laws are coming from facebook. Also Planitir. They are also behind some of the funding for lobbying for the laws. They use what's called template laws where they write a legal template that can be sent across the country to form the basis of laws that pass everywhere.

No we don't exactly know why. But it doesn't take a lot to figure out. It doesn't really drastically improve their tracking but what it does do is let them know that you are real. That's why we know it's about detecting AI slop.