I don't think that's a meaningful question to ask, since it seems to be based on the flawed premise that there should only be a limited market for creative work, and that the forces of supply and demand ought to dictate how we as a society should value such work.

And what the developments in generative AI have shown us is that those same market forces have no problem trying to replace the underappreciated, underpaid work of countless artists and creative industry employees with a neverending firehose of AI slop.

The human desire to create and the desire for imaginative self-expression is extremely deep seated. To be told that this is economically worthless, easily replaceable, and undeserving of recognition, while at the same time the very means for automated generation of AI slop are stolen from and built upon centuries of handcrafted, human-imagined labor, is the height of hypocrisy.

So, to answer your useless question, no. The world does NOT need more starving artists. What the world needs is to properly recognize the value of human art and creative expression. And to the extent that technology is being used to suppress the worth of others, I say artists have every right to reject it. I hate the panoptic, uneducated society we have become. I detest how creative people are being forced to choose between bringing something new into this world, versus preventing some tech oligarch from training a LLM model on it. I despise the fact that mega-corporations routinely wield their vast financial and legal resources to protect the enormously profitable intellectual property that they pay slave wages to artists to create.

I don't know this Eggers guy. I haven't read his books. Whatever he wants to do with his time and money is up to him. But wanting to give more people a pathway to create, and to do it without having it stolen by the Zuckerbergs and Musks and Altmans and Bezoses of this world so that they can turn around and claim that the same things they've stolen are not really worth anything after all, is, in my opinion, better than sitting behind a computer asking whether the market for art is saturated.

I have literally never seen anyone who uses Arch make any claims whatsoever about the AUR being a safe or secure place to get packages. It's a standard disclaimer to install packages from there at your own risk. Which is fine: Arch is not at all designed to be newbie friendly to begin with, so having an extended package universe that is "install at your own risk" is fine: you should use Arch iff you're very well aware of the risks of something like the AUR.

Interesting! I have to read that.

Thank you!

I agree, it is brain dead like so many idiotic things MS is doing.

I had to fix a laptop for a guy I know today. There are "three fingere gestures" active on the trackpad - no one knows what they do.

I switch off all that bullshit on my laptops (does not matter if Mac or Windows) I am seriously not in the mood to memorize "oh what did I do, with my fingers?" and how to revert it ...

And I seriously can not remember why in one app swiping left is like and in the other it is swiping right.

When I want to delete an email by "swiping" it gets into "archived" what the fark is that?

I guess it is fair to round it up to 569, or even 580ml then?
Pints in Thailand are 620, I assumed UK would be the same.

Dude, obviously UK will have border controls.

THEY WOULD BE AT THE BORDER OF THE EU ... how dumb are you?

It is a damn island. Of course they will have border controls.

And no one cares if they keep the pound, or what ever.

POUND and EURO are damn currencies, and have nothing to do with the EU.

Neither has Schengen anything to do with the EU.

This are contracts that only overlap a (some) certain area(s) of Europe.

You are free to choose, if the others agree, if you join the EU zone, or Schengen, or not.

And as a border country, I assume the Margrave of "the British Islands", will do his duty and do border controls to all people that enter the future EU where "the British Islands" might be a part again: just as he is doing right now!

Who is so farking stupid to assume the EU has no border controls? Farking idiots on /. do.

That is actually how the vote turned out.
A big deal of votes where young people doing fun votes, because they never could imagine that BREXIT would win.
There where we "vote for BREXIT" student parties ...

A pint in a pub is "metric".

Nearly all Irish / British pubs in Germany sell pints. Either fake pints with 500ml content, but they write "pint" as headline over the drinks, or: real pints. 620ml.

You can name the stuff how ever you want, the point is that on the menu is clear: how many grams or ml that is.

What UK is doing inside of their country regarding measuring: no one cares. Relevant is if there is for example a web site that sells to France/Germany etc. and the measures "of what ever" make no sense ... then it is a problem.

Yeah, I was gonna say... regardless of my personal dislike for the wireless wiretap law, it lapsing will be more of a problem for the next president - the current one wants his briefings to focus on news clips that mention him.

Half of the nice people who voted for BREXIT will be dead then.
Half of the nice people who would vote next year to R-EU-JOIN, will be 40 when they could join again.

Your idea makes no sense at all ... unless you aim to keep them out forever.

Then: EU and EURO are two different things, and rightful so.

I've owned more than one inexpensive Windows laptop that I only discovered to be a touchscreen by accident - like most sane people I see only ergonomic downsides in a touchscreen computer. In fact one of the reasons I prefer to use a computer with a keyboard and mouse is precisely to avoid sliding my finger around a touchscreen. With that said, it appears to add little to the cost, so I guess I am happy to continue completely ignoring it on Macs as well as PCs.

Rich people don't liquidate assets when they want to buy something.

They get a loan against their assets. At extremely good rates. And no, they never pay them back. The strategy is called "buy, borrow, die".

First, you need to understand that if the stock price goes up more than their (low) interest rate, they're still making money.

Second, the whole thing is rolled up only when the ultra-rich person dies. The assets are revalued to their current market price at the time of death, wiping out decades of built-in capital gains tax liability. The estate can then sell a portion of the tax-free assets to pay off the outstanding loans.

tl;dr: They don't liquidate assets, if they did they'd have to pay taxes.

The reason for that isn't socialism, though. It's incompetence and corruption. Politics attracts the most incompetent and the most corrupt of people, always has and always will. Basically: If you're shit at everything else, you can always try making a career of telling other people what to do.

In theory. In reality, that has always been bullshit. The various bubbles, crashes and other events prove that. Valuations on the stock market are based on expectations, and expectations always include an element that is not rational.

True, though both of these companies do have an actual business and actual assets. There's plenty of companies on the stock market whose entire business can just pack up and leave tomorrow. Many of those are extremely highly valued. All the middle-men companies (ride sharing, food delivery, etc.) all work on the principle of outsourcing EVERYTHING. They hold no actual assets and their entire business model can be copied in a lazy weekend. Each and every one of them survives due to brand recognition, habit and by being just a little bit better in some way than alternatives. All of which can disappear in a week.

Tesla and SpaceX are overvalued. But they have factories and a workforce and produce things.Their value is not entirely made up.

Because of the significantly higher power and water rates they won't be paying, or because of the half-dozen relatively low-paying jobs that won't be created?