1) Not tied to frequent fuel deliveries

2) Does not require much that humans don't already need - sun and air. (Variability will affect your power storage needs)

3) It can be deployed almost anywhere, and even be portable.

The main issue is energy density - if you want to drive hundreds of kilometers a day, run your AC all summer and heat all winter, etc., you're going to need a lot of land dedicated to power collection.

I imagine there are a lot of places in a continent like Africa where people might be happy to get by on what solar can give them in return for not having to worry about burning oil or anything else to get electricity.

A deep crater at the south pole in eternal darkness, with the ability to raise solar collectors above the rim for eternal sunshine, and you have excellent conditions for observing the skies.

If you use Amazon or Microsoft, your data is as protected as Trump's next tantrum. Actually worse than that, as there will be people seeking compliance in advance and nobody gives a damn about American laws nevermind yours.

> depending on an imperfect random number generator. Renner's coworkers could then amplify the randomness of the measurement results further using a special algorithm.

You can't take a non-random source and make it random with an algorithm. Either there is true randomness in the input or there isn't. The algorithm is deterministic.

Given the reference list, I suspect not ChatGPT, but rather https://magisterium.com/

I guess we can add a whole new category to the Darwin Awards.

I'm fine. I plan to switch to self-employment and provide artisinal technical support, perhaps via OnlyFans.

Sure, maybe I'll have to prominently display my bare feet or hawk used headsets to my clients, but it's a small inconvenience.

Damnit. WFH.

I knew what I meant!

I provide IT support to insurance brokerages - you may or not be surprised to find that since COVID, they're continuing to convert to WFO.

Especially for the boutique shops, I doubt an RTO office can compete financially with one structured under a WFH model.

For most roles in the process, WFH should be very desirable to an employer, so long as the employee signs an appropriate contract indicating that they're obligated to come to the office should their home setup be inadequate for supporting WFH, including mandatory local installations of whatever communications and collaboration tool you decide to employ.

Maybe you require them to attend a certain number of in-person meetings or team building exercises (but not 3/week, I'm talking monthly or less).

It saves on office space and related expenses. Throw up a suitable server farm and have employees remote in - all the horsepower, storage, and data security of a data center, it's potentially more secure than a cubicle farm.

Forcing RTO is just a way to fire people without having to admit you replaced them with a lower quality but much less expensive AI.

Company scrip. You'll swear fealty to a Tech Bro, and in return you'll get scrip you can spend on whatever their empire produces. They will control what is available and how much of it you can have.

They want to be gods on Earth.

Eventually, they're going to realize they don't need 8 billion people consuming energy and resources when they can sustain their lifestyle with a few thousand people and a few billion robots, and then things get very sad for a while.

We are in an economic system based on ownership, with an ever-shrinking group of people owning an ever-growing percentage of things and making everyone else rent from them.

As labor is replaced by AI and robots, more and more people will exist who are not needed in this economic model, and while there's no need for a few people to own everything... they're not going to give it up.

UBI is a stop-gap. It still leaves a small hereditary capital class in control, because they will be the ones in charge of who gets UBI and how much. Because it will not be 'universal' in distribution.

We can't dial back human labor, because we're heading for a time when so little human labor is required that an individual share wouldn't be practical.

We're still going to have scarcity - you're going to want a place to live, you're going to need energy to power things, you're going to need a share of resources to have those things produced for you. There is no 'post-scarcity' on these fronts.

I look to the south, and if a bit of Canadian cultural propaganda is required to counter the stuff that's been coming out of Hollywood for the last century... OK.

We value education more, guns less. We value cooperation more, greed less. We're OK with single-payer healthcare instead of letting the rich at the top get richer bleeding us to death, and you're not going to convince us that's wrong because somebody else is getting healthcare 'for free'.

There's a reason so many Americans have recently discovered their Canadian roots and want our passport, and it's not because things are going well in the US.

> No different than AI/LLM.

One involves sentient minds, the other doesn't. Come back with that argument when it's reasonable to believe an AI could actually be self-aware.