Living in the world of "should" leads to all sorts of bad decisions. Right now, solar is the fastest and easiest form of green energy to deploy. Last year, the U.S. installed 43 GW of solar power and is projected to install about 40 GW per year through 2030, despite Trump's bad decisions.

SMRs generate up to 300MW. So, to match solar output, we would need to produce roughly 1200+ SMR units per year. Classic nuclear reactors produce a gigawatt, so we would need to build 40ish nuclear reactors per year to match the incremental solar, the yearly increase in solar power.
There is the issue of storage, which is necessary for both solar and nuclear power generation. For solar, it's storing excess production, and for nuclear, it is storing at times of insufficient consumption.

Given that SMR is not here yet and is at least 5 to 10 years away, and that large nuclear power plants take 15 to 20 years to come online, solar has a 400-gigawatt head start, and a better land use footprint, assuming cities started covering parking garages and parking lots with solar panels, and farmers took advantage of the agrivoltaic possibilities of solar farms. When you add in the additional factor that solar farms modify the local ecology in a positive direction (improved biodiversity, better soil moisture retention, and better environment for grazing animals), one could ask why you would want to use a nuclear-powered tea kettle.

There are many storage options, but battery seems to be the most practical/effective system, in part because it can be deployed incrementally and serve as the basis for a distributed grid. Right now, ordinary people can buy a 16-kilowatt-hour battery pack for $1,700. This makes it practical to take advantage of time-of-use tariffs and significantly drop your energy bill. It's even better financially if you can convert a grid-tied solar system to zero export with a pack of that size. I haven't done the math yet, but I suspect that even with a small 3-5 kilowatt-hour battery and a kilowatt solar panel array, combined with time-of-use tariffs, you could also significantly reduce your power bill by importing electricity when it is cheap.

While overall deaths have declined, over 55 adults and minority populations are still seeing a year-over-year increase. Other factors include a series of public health measures, such as Narcan availability, expanded treatment access, and behavioral shifts in younger generations away from general substance use.

By that logic, all an AI company needs to do is buy a single copy of a work. Then they're free to do what they want with the content (doctrine of first sale).

As to your other other questions,

I would buy a knockoff.
I wouldn't steal a television or take one that fell off the back of a truck. However, I would repurpose a computer monitor to show televised content.
I would transcode DVD content into MP4.

Stealing is a crime; it's not just the AI companies that are "stealing." It's hard to throw a rock without hitting a company or a member of the Trump administration engaged in some form of theft.

Talk to the publishers about that one. The middlemen at the publishing company have broken the customer-to-author revenue stream.

If you are running your own company or companies, yes, you do deserve rewards from that. The question is how much? At what point are you collecting money just for the sake of collecting money? Once you exceed some TBD threshold, you are stealing from the people who did the actual work that made you that money.

We have lost manufacturing and many other commercial activities that made this country great, not because of socialist policy but because of rent seekers, financial engineering, and leeches like private equity. We would be much better off if we put a cap on wealth and dividends to shareholders. Money, like power, corrupts in proportion to the amount you collect..

It is all IBM's fault.

a solution for the homeless problem. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

You're making a faulty assumption a lot of public transit advocates make which is that a person travels on, paths and times with lots of other people and they have plenty of time to waste.

It's always instructive to compare different options. For example my partner commutes into the major Boston University from out on the second ring road (495) non-rush-hour, 35 minute drive, 90 minute to 120 minute public transit depending on when you start.. Moderate rush-hour, 50 minutes driving, closer to the 120 minute public transit route. Heavy rush-hour, 90 minutes driving, 2 1/2 hours public transit. To add further insult to injury, she needs to change modes five times on public transit whereas she can just drive them door-to-door, not worried about being hassled by uncouth train riders.

I would be happy with a 1:1 replacement of an ICE with an EV. Having cars gives us a greater range of opportunities. We are not constrained to employers that are on or near public transit. When either of us change jobs, we don't need to move. We just set a different destination GPS and learn traffic patterns. We are not constrained to retailers close by. If we don't like how they do business, what products they offer, or the price they're selling it for, we can go somewhere else.

My main complaint about the EV market is that they are building them to big or ordinary use and not flexible enough for the exceptional use. Battery mass is an engineering problem and there are solutions in the queue. But I'm quite fine with the car this half the size of what I currently have. I just need to be able to carry sheets of plywood occasionally, haul a couple hundred pounds of bulky telescope kit and kit for a long weekend of car camping with my partner.

Just as you can't tell the difference between electrons for home use versus your car, you can't tell the difference between home heating oil and diesel fuel. The state cares because they tax diesel fuel but not home heating oil.

As a result, we are long overdue for converting from a fuel based road use tax to a miles, mass, and axles road use tax.

yes I do. One of the problems with speech recognition is remembering what you said causes you not to see the words generated, and so you miss errors when you proofread. Should the F something is uninteresting It should be if something is uninteresting. This is another reason why I like chat GPT for code creation. I can dictate text far easier than I can ever dictate code. also, Grammarly helps find and fix errors in recognition.

FWIW, I'm already using chatGPT to delay hiring another person in my solo practice. When I do hire, I will expect the person to use chatgpt to handle the noise level work like simple coding and business emails.

----

The future arrives too soon and in the wrong order. Capitalism has been shedding workers through technology, Financial engineering and exploiting cost differentials around the globe. LLM systems are only accelerating the rate at which capitalism sheds workers.

The natural outcome is that we will have more people than jobs much sooner than we expected. We only have a few options. Cities are only six meals or 12 hours without power from a major riot. The most peaceful solution would be just enough of a Ubi with guaranteed shelter and food to keep people from rioting. By riffing off of the current Republican / conservative chatter that "high taxes are bad because they hurt rich people and you know, you could be a rich person someday", you could further increase compliance and docile behavior in the masses.

The best solution would be a Ubi with enough of us technologists acting in concert to develop software and machine learning systems that can be used to exploit weaknesses in the oligarchy. I'm hopeful. Smart people interpret censorship is damage and route around it.

An alternative best solution would be to tax the revenue generated by LLMs and put the money into a sovereign fund which is used to pay for society's needs. While we're at it should probably also require public corporations to deposit shares in a sovereign fund to help pay for some of what they use.

Here are four ways I use ChatGPT successfully.

1. Summarizing articles: I don't have time to read. If the some reason interesting, I move on. If it is, I go to the original material. Saves me a lot of time.
2. Generating a skeleton for writing: There is an awful lot of boilerplate in writing and chat GPT can crank it out like nobody's business and I can tell what to keep, what to toss, and what to change. ChatGPT is more consistent than I am through a body of work but it also lets me capture my thoughts, and my logical structure about what I'm trying to express. In the end, it's my work.
3. Writing code: I treat chat GPT like it was a junior programmer. I give it a fairly detailed set of instructions of what the data looks like, the structure, the input and output of the software, arguments Etc and see what I get. Like with the junior programmer, I tell it to make corrections but I don't give it code. I use a more natural language expression to change the approach or add functionality through the entire body of work. Eventually, I get something that looks like code I would have written myself.
4. Translating code from one language to another: Just like with the writing code example above, I start with an existing piece of code, translate it to another coding language, and then start modifying the new code by commands to chatGPT

I don't worry about taking somebody else's work because I learned how to write, code, draw, and analyze by reading and mimicking the source materials. I know enough about the creative process to know that nobody ever creates something truly original except in very very rare circumstances. Everything is built on something else.

it may be time for regulation requiring that all products be repairable by the end user. Look at the fair phone for an example. repairing doesn't eliminate the waste stream but it does greatly reduce it.

Non-negotiable license agreements can fix that. Never underestimate the ability of a corporate lawyer to fuck up a free market

A free market is a market with government regulation sufficient to prevent cheating. Otherwise, how can you consider a market free if your opponents engage in dirty tricks to drive you out of the market?