Comment Stacking the deck, not in our favor. (Score 1) 124
Microplastics and forever chemicals. I'm sure with the collapse of any kind of regulation over industry there will be more reasons.
Microplastics and forever chemicals. I'm sure with the collapse of any kind of regulation over industry there will be more reasons.
Is this anything like drug use?
They have to stay inside a bubble and a safe space because otherwise reality comes crashing down and they're just not prepared to deal with that.
The point were "deal with it" is going to be a harsh one then. A lot of people may even die, and from that standpoint the Darwin crowd may see it as a self-correcting problem.
No different than cloud complaints. Both can be installed locally if needed. Harder part with both is finding the expertise.
Checking work applies as much to calculator handiwork as it does LLM output. Especially in something with high consequences.
Homelabbing with AI as a growth market with a side order of everything else.
It has a huge impact because it devalues these kinds of deals and just supports the idea that these companies can run roughshod over IP rights, steal, and pillage to their hearts content without consequence.
Whoo Hoo! You go, Piratebay!
Superinsulation goes a long way towards making that last.
There's the third world to sell to. Especially in keeping with the quality of most power grids out there.
Reading the above poster one could say it's even worse.
Final Take
This isn’t just “one big contract.” This is institutional capture via administrative machinery—what some would call “soft monopolization” of public service delivery. Whether or not it’s technically legal under current DoD policies, it undermines the entire premise of competitive, accountable, mission-driven procurement.
This should absolutely raise alarms—especially for:
Congressional oversight committees
GAO watchdogs
Inspector General offices*
Any contractor not named Palantir
*And remember whom DOGE got rid of several months ago.
DOGE as the enabler, downsizing oversight and removing legacy bottlenecks—all while aligning IT power with Palantir-friendly professionals.
Palantir gained unprecedented access to internal agency data, solidified by cooperative engineering projects, and now holds a nearly unassailable position with the Army.
The combination of data architecture control, contract simplification, and institutional alignment makes this a structural shift—not merely an efficiency narrative.
Needs moar red light districts.
With the water sensor it can be a great flood detector as well.
Moderation is the fediverses biggest issue, especially across diverse clients.
No scalable system that:
Promotes pluralism,
Enforces civility and transparency,
And resists ideological filtering without chaos.
Maybe some ideas from Kialo and Pol.is.
To the first point—exactly. That’s what I meant by “holding up a mirror.” Superman isn’t just challenged by villains; he’s challenged by the complexity of modern moral expectations. Drop him into today's geopolitical minefields and suddenly the clarity of “truth, justice, and the American way” starts to buckle. And unlike most other characters, he’d care. Deeply. That tension is worth exploring, not dismissing.
As for the “Watchmen” reply—sure, Watchmen explored these themes, but so did Kingdom Come, Red Son, Irredeemable, and even plenty of canonical Superman arcs. The fact that writers have been tackling this for decades doesn’t mean the question’s dead—it means it’s still unresolved. And every generation has a new lens to view it through.
Quoting Watchmen like it’s the final word on moral complexity is a bit like saying “Orwell already covered surveillance, so shut up about the NSA.”
You're not wrong that Superman’s actions might look like idealized policing—but that’s exactly the issue. He’s not just a super-cop. He’s a moral symbol in a world that’s gotten increasingly skeptical of symbols.
The original comment didn’t suggest people today would literally chant "kill him!" in the streets. It pointed to something more subtle: the growing cultural trend toward results over ideals. The "pragmatism" isn’t about bloodlust—it’s about how often modern narratives reward characters who get their hands dirty, who bend rules, who do what needs to be done. Think Jack Bauer, Homelander (ironically), or even Batman in some arcs.
Superman’s refusal to kill—even when it's convenient—isn’t just old-fashioned. It’s jarringly idealistic in a climate where even heroes are expected to compromise. That’s not sociopathy. That’s cultural commentary.
And maybe that discomfort is the point.
The tao that can be tar(1)ed is not the entire Tao. The path that can be specified is not the Full Path.