Under the current US regime? Oh, you sweet summer child!

I think your pessimism is unwarranted. I would agree that the US is trying to destroy Western society; but I don't think they will succeed, unless they start lobbing nukes.

Short of that they'll put us all through some shitty hard times. But they've dropped their drawers and demonstrated that, short of nukes, their vaunted military superiority is largely a bluff.

The rest of the Western world stands a good chance of surviving - and maintaining its values and social order - as America continues its transformation into the world's largest banana republic. The country still has some bite to go along with its bark, but this emperor's closet is starting to look exceedingly bare.

Well, for starters it's a "building full of computers" which produces hellacious amounts of noise - including infrasonic energy which has serious negative health effects even on deaf people.

Then there's the question of how it will be cooled, and what effects that cooling might have on local wildlife and habitats / waterways.

Then there's the consideration that the facility may well make use of power generated by burning hydrocarbons. Isn't it a grand idea to be hastening global warming for the sole purpose of producing weapons of mass destruction? But if your ultimate goal is to kill off the majority of humankind - as broligarchs like Thiel and Andreesen seem to want - then I guess this data centre is a double-whammy (Make America) Great (Again) idea.

Finally, funneling more wealth and power to people whose bottom line is improved by the destruction of our fellow men seems - uh, what's the word I'm searching for... "counterproductive"?

You seem to be somewhat right of Attila the Hun, and to have little use for us Democratic Socialists. If I'm correct - or even close - then I propose that perhaps your beliefs don't serve the long-term interests of you and the people you care for.

Gah - it's been a Lazarus Long time since I last read Heinlein.

Damn you, you stole my comment!

Isn't it telling that China is really doing this - and stands a good chance of succeeding - while Elon is still having Ketamine dreams about Mars and dropping rockets here on Earth?

I am laughing my ass off even as I write this - which fact is its own kind of sadness, as well as a condemnation of what the world has come to. So, thanks - I guess?

Yet. Give it time.

I'm only half joking. I can see them at least putting an AI wrapper on Task Manager to "interpret" its output and offer "helpful suggestions" - including the suggestion to purchase hardware and subscription upgrades.

Most insightful - I wish I had mod points.

I dunno. Way back when tiny GPS units swaying on the dashboard were all the rage, I don't recall a big increase in accidents tied to them. Except for those caused by substituting the GPS directions for eyesight and common sense, that is. Maybe because the GPS wasn't primarily an interactive device?

I'm sure you read this: https://entertainment.slashdot...

Even I was shocked by that story. And while writing this I just had another thought: What's it going to be like when car manufacturers start imitating the fucktards at Apple and Google? Every new update brings fresh misery as people try to figure how to do today what muscle memory accomplished yesterday.

My wife and I currently have a loaner from the dealer while our car is in for repairs. In just two days of driving a '26 Accord, I find the honkin' big screen too cluttered and distracting. And even with such a big screen, Honda saw fit to put a little square patch on the instrument cluster which shows images broadcast by the station we were listening to. Because it changes randomly with no connection to driving, it's a stupid and pointless distraction.

I am not a fan of video screens in a car, other than for GPS. I might feel differently if I had control over what gets displayed and if I could disable all the spying that the associated electronics are doing. But mostly, just "no" - I don't need that shit in my car.

I take your point about the first amendment - it hadn't occurred to me but it makes sense.

Given the context, do you think there's some kind of societal change that could be engineered to make its consequences less extreme? It occurs to me that an instrument as powerful as the first amendment demands of citizens a sense of responsibility and restraint. I suspect the founders didn't foresee the extremes of self-centredness, obliviousness, and ignorance that today's America suffers from.

Good point, but also a false dichotomy. There IS a middle ground, where some (arbitrary until research gives further guidance) amount of "what I'm interested in" is mixed with some other amount of "everything else regardless of my viewing and posting history" and delivered as posts, recommendations, or whatever.

Of course, this would ultimately result in less addiction to the platforms, and therefore less profit. I see that as yet another argument in favour of social media being regarded as part of the common; by this point in time it's effectively societal infrastructure anyway, so it should be a tax-funded and government-run thing, kind of like a utility.

I can already here the objections, and I'm not presenting it as a finished solution, but rather as a talking point. Clearly, corporate-controlled social media of ALL kinds need to be very heavily regulated and/or dismantled. A LOT of the corporatocracy needs to be dismantled.

By attributing this primarily to "habits" I think you're minimizing the difficulty here. Maybe because in English we use "habit" to describe both an accustomed and reflexive action, and a biological addiction?

The distinction is important. TFS says "children born just a few months apart had very different levels of sugar exposure both in the womb and during early childhood". It also says "early-life sugar exposure continued to affect people's diets even 50 years later".

From those I deduce both a five-alarm fire of a health crisis, and a major crime. I think the what the the food industry has done to make this situation worse during my lifetime makes the things that Big Tobacco did look like shoplifting by comparison.

I don't get that. When costs go up, wages go up. There's no reason not to include minimum wage in that scheme. Yes, it's a kind of rat race - that seems to be the nature of economies. My old sig seems relevant here: "The Economy is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn".

I also think the experience of many Europeans contradicts your contention. People working in food service industries in some countries there enjoy paid vacations which some US tech workers would be jealous of. These people have decent lives, leisure time, and good healthcare.

Things are similar here in Canada, although probably not as good as in Europe. Our policies and expectations have been pretty heavily shaped by America's. That may change now that the US has jumped the shark and is busy making itself irrelevant to the rest of the world.

I think there's lots of evidence that a minimum wage which follows wages in general results in durable, worthwhile benefits to a society.