And the data says...

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/se...

False.

This is just something socialists say, and often, because they need naive followers to buy into their crap to obtain any measure of power, but it has no basis in reality. Unless you live in Canada, Europe (except Belgium), or Russia (which would make a lot of sense in your case) but you're using US pricing, which suggests US context.

Even after you adjust for housing, food, health care, taxes, and other mandatory expenses as suggested by rsilvertard, people are still bringing in more.

https://www.macrotrends.net/30...

The disconnect you're having is I operate based on empiricism, in other words, what can be observed and measured, where you're already known to manufacture and/or spread disinformation.

Smartphones and tablets are essentially digital babysitters in this day and age.

Go to any restaurant and look around ( assuming you aren't a part of the problem by being addicted to your own phone ).
Make a note of how many families are there with every member of said family doing nothing but playing with their phones.

Go to the park, make a note of how many people are walking, jogging, riding their bikes, walking the dog, etc. all while staring at their phone.

Blasting down the freeway at 80mph and, yep, many of them are staring at their phone.

It's rather sad.

Hands down the most addictive invention within the last several decades imo.
But the Governments will do nothing about it because the devices are loaded with surveillance / data harvesting tech they love.

The smartphone is to humanity in modern socieity what a pacifier or security blanket is to a toddler.
They're fine as long as they have their favorite little toy in hand.

Deny them said toy, however, and they will absolutely lose their mind.

Bringing the cost down is also an engineering problem. NASA and the ESA both said reusable rockets weren't economical even though they already knew it was possible. The ESA even famously poo-poo'd the idea, exactly like you guys are doing here. I personally don't know whether this will work. If somebody -- anybody -- has an idea for how they can make it work, then unlike you and apparently most others on slashdot, I'm not going to try to stop it, nor do I see any good reason for that.

Besides, I'm not seeing the argument for fraud, which is what GP asserted, and is what I responded to. If you disagree, then who is defrauding whom? Perusing an idea that ultimately doesn't work isn't fraud, it's just business. Most ideas don't work, which is why so many businesses fail. That's why investing carries risk.

I didn't cherry-pick anything. You tried to make the consumption sound like a bigger deal than it really is.

Let's see your math then -- show us how much more carbon you save by keeping them on the ground. You're the one making the assertion on this, so put up or shut up. What you're doing here, by the way -- that's handwaving.

I already made it abundantly clear that it's not. Regardless, the concept has already been proven.

https://www.pnnl.gov/news-medi...

Perhaps to fuel a rocket. Gee, ya think?

Actually, normal human tongues are red. The reason yours is that brownish color is because you eat a lot of ass.

I just told you, dingleberry, it's being funded by Starlink.

I didn't give any whataboutism. Putting your numbers into broader perspective isn't whataboutism, it's used purely to indicate how meaningless your argument is just by the sheer scale of it. You literally complained about the entire aggregate carbon output for the entire lifetime of this project, which pales in comparison to just one day of global methane use.

Since you're splitting hairs over trivial amounts of carbon, why not off yourself? Less carbon is less carbon.

I did make it abundantly clear that it's not a thing yet. How much more clear do you need it?

Umm...ok? If you're so certain about that, go short SpaceX and Tesla.

Stop trying to sound intellectual, you're so bad at it. I didn't handwave anything -- I literally told you that I don't know why it didn't work, and in a previous post I already told you that I have no idea if this concept will work at all. Handwaving is doing exactly the opposite, which you'd know if you weren't dumb as a rock.

Appologies for the silly question ( I just woke up ) but wouldn't a simple VPN be all that is needed to
bypass this ?

I'm assuming they're doing some dynamic geolocation to determine if the phone is in Texas at the time
the App Store was accessed.

If true, I think Texas will become the greatest salesman for VPN's there is.
( I can't imagine how many have one installed already for sites like Pornhub )

Unless they next plan on banning VPN's within the State, they should probably look at alternatives to
this idea of annoying the sh*t out of all the voting adults while also annoying all the future voting kids
they're trying to " protect ".

The odds of Anthropic only using this for Chinese users is quite low.

I would be more surprised if the public " AI " systems like Claude aren't tracking everything and everyone.
Regardless of what country they are in.

But, like usual, anytime they get caught, they will simply blame some junior engineer or claim this was developer
code that accidentally made it into production.

So, if you become known as the guy who hates these cameras by bringing it up in court / city council meetings, they'll have their primary suspect
when said cameras start getting destroyed after city coucil / courts do absolutely nothing.

It won't get all of them, but banning smartphones for anyone under 16 will likely cull the majority of this issue.
( They can still have a dumb phone to keep in touch with parents )

Parents will have to be parents and keep them off home desktops / tablets / etc.

The other method would be to instead fine the parents instead of the platforms.
( The parents are providing the hardware means to access to the platforms in most cases )

Make the fine cost 2x the price of a smartphone and the parents will take away said phones themselves.

While there are potential substitute / alternative applications that claim to be just as
good as their Windows counterparts, I've never seen it. If they truly existed, folks
would have switched to Linux a long time ago and never looked back.

Gaming is a good example.

While it has improved a bit over the past five or so years, Linux is still lagging behind
Windows in this category. When any game that runs natively on Windows can also be
run -natively- ( read that: no emulators ) on Linux, then we can consider this problem
to be solved.

Music and DAW

I have both Ableton Live Studio and Akai MPC 2/3 on a Windows box. Neither are
available on Linux nor are the drivers that interface the hardware with the software.

Zbrush

To my knowledge, Zbrush is not available on Linux with Blenders sculpting tools being
the only contender that I am aware of. While Blender tries, it can't compete with Zbrush.

Adobe CC and Substance Suites

None of the Substance Suite ( Painter / Sampler / Designer, etc ) is available on Linux as
it is part of the Adobe CC Suite. Gimp is not a substitute for Photoshop imo. Affinity
requires Wine or some other emulation to work.

I have a Cintiq Pro 32" display and I have yet to get Linux to recognize the stylus so I can
actually use it as a tablet. It isn't natively supported on Linux by Wacom and ultimately I
gave up on trying.

As a result, I run two separate hardware boxes. One running Windows with much of the
aforementioned software that Linux can't deal with and my daily driver Linux box for
roaming around the internet.

I see it as a catch-22.

Developers won't commit to a Linux variant of their software because the market isn't there.
The market will never be there until developers commit to it :|

Quantum is nothing but a marketing buzzword to generate interest / investment.

Similar to:

AI
Bitcoin
Blockchain
Cloud
IOT
etc

So, Al Gore used to preach the same things about conservation and how we all need to limit
our consumption of everything to help save the planet.

It's funny how the upper class never seems to suffer through any of this. They're not using less.
In fact, they're using far more than the average person by any measurable metric.

Yet, they want US to sacrifice our comfort for the sake of their own. :|

I laugh when I see the " Please set your thermostat to 78f to conserver power " all while we're
allowing the Team Bitcoin Mining Facilities to eat more power than entire cities. . . . .

AC systems typically use far less power than heating systems ( assuming electric ).

A central heating system can easily pull 10-15kW while running. ( the latter being a two stage system )

It's somewhat easier to build out power generation systems based on variables that you know.

Where it tends to go sideways is when those surprise variables turn up and flip the entire table over.

I suppose one of the ways to counter the unknown variables is to simply build enough generation to cover
twice what you really need. Use a portion of it to act as a buffer for the aforementioned surprises and sell
any remaining to your neighboring States to help pay for the upkeep or the cost of ever expanding demand
as the population continues to grow.

" I have yet to see anyone explain to me how you prevent businessmen from coming in and skipping all the maintenance so they can pocket a shitload of short-term profits. "

It's called State and Federal regulation.

If you don't pass ( and continue to pass ) all of the State and Federal inspections that go on during the lifetime of the facility, they simply revoke your license
and shut you down.