If you want to keep burning fuels, making synfuels doesn't appear as if it will make sense any time soon, because of the energy cost. It's a lot cheaper to make biofuel from algae grown in open raceway ponds as proven at Sandia NREL in the 1980s (yes, I have been posting sentences similar to that here for decades) because you get the energy for making the hydrocarbon chains from the sun. Clean water is hard to come by, but algae doesn't need clean water to grow in; it can be contaminated, brackish, etc.

But the oil companies are some of the biggest lobbyists, so they are going to get their way. For a moment there I thought they were going to dominate solar power, which would allow them to remain relevant going into the future; they can easily afford to sponsor regulatory capture which would make them the de facto winners in the space, but they are choosing to ride petroleum into the future because it's the cheapest source of energy, so there's simply more profit to be made there. And they have never cared about externalities, so why start caring now? The owners don't live downwind or downstream from refineries, and if they do, they can afford to move. It's cheaper than cleaning up.

In order to protect their monopolies on liquid fuels, the oil companies will certainly steer us towards synfuels as much as they can when petroleum becomes nonviable. They are compatible with their existing distribution networks, and don't require the massive amounts of land that biofuel from algae would. There is plenty of land that's not really useful for anything but energy farms (whether solar, algae, or both) but it would be a hassle to acquire it for energy production and there's money to be made without all that hassle, and nobody in charge cares that profiting from it involves destruction of the biosphere we need to live.

Capitalism is not a subscription service. It is a means of control based on fictional abstraction.

The very first statement in the article you cited is "Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their use for the purpose of obtaining profit." You cited it without understanding it. The top of the second paragraph states:

Economists, historians, political economists, and sociologists have adopted different perspectives in their analyses of capitalism and have recognized various forms of it in practice. These include laissez-faire or free-market capitalism, state capitalism, and welfare capitalism. Different forms of capitalism feature varying degrees of free markets, public ownership,[14] obstacles to free competition, and state-sanctioned social policies.

You are imagining things about Capitalism which are not simply Capitalism. They are parts of specific kinds of Capitalism. Capitalism itself does not include any of the things you specified as parts of Capitalism. This is exactly what I was talking about in my prior comment when I mentioned "imagination." Those things you imagine to be inherent parts of capitalism are not at all inherent. You imagined that, and you're doing yourself a disservice by lying to yourself every time you imagine that they are inherent properties. The question then becomes why do you expect anyone else to share your delusion? And to reiterate, why did you cite as evidence for your opinion a reference which disproves it?

Capitalism itself, without any modifiers, only specifies that capital controls the means of production. Without placing additional controls beyond private property and its protection by law, which is the only thing required to have capitalism besides capital itself (and that itself is only a form of private property which is legislated into existence) capitalism naturally leads to crony capitalism, because capital naturally accrues capital by controlling opportunity. More highly structured and controlled forms of capitalism (with specific additional controls) are possible, and most would argue more desirable. This is what you are talking about when you assert that capitalism is based on competition or freedom of choice, which concepts support one another. But those things are a spectrum, not a boolean, and capitalism continues to exist even in their complete absence — it only becomes more oppressive. And those are not emergent properties of capitalism — in fact, without controls to preserve them, capitalism destroys them. Or more honestly, capitalists act willfully to destroy them because they limit the accrual of capital for the most successful, and capitalists tend to believe they will be the beneficiaries of such changes even though most of them will lose, as such a game has a very limited number of winners and everyone else suffers.

Capitalism leads naturally to fascism. And here we are!

I meant to say rsh there, whoops. But I also absolutely, positively, definitely never said that people were using either thing for hypertext.

It is more or less, but (again) as I said, it was obvious. The term "hypertext" is from 1965!

Users are not the product as they are not being sold as slaves.

Users are more like natural resources, they exist to be exploited.

Like natural resources, corporations give zero fucks about which users are destroyed figuratively or literally, because there are more users behind them to exploit. We literally have industries selling products known to kill people which prove this point. The government has whole bodies of law which permit them to exist and to continue to sell their products.

This part is exactly true. This is what happens naturally when you allow capital to control the means of production.

wat

Nobody is more capitalist than Cheeto Benito.

Capitalism means one and only one thing, capital controls the means of production. When you imagine it means other things you're doing yourself a disservice. When you then go on to make statements based on those imaginings you're doing everyone one.

Capitalism is founded on ONE principle, he who has the gold makes the rules. All that other stuff is window dressing bullshit.

The wealthy want to have everything and pretend the poor won't come looking for food. It's not clear why they want to pretend it won't happen again when it always happens

Hardware and/or LLM as a service fees.

Two thirds of the voters are that dumb, as the ones who didn't vote are also idiots. The only message you send by not voting is that you will roll over.

Put stereo controls on the steering wheel, even cheap cars often offer this as an option now anyway. Put physical climate controls below the screen. You might need to look to grab the knob, but you can look at the road while you turn it. With some of these screen-only climate control systems they have sliders or other stupid controls that require a lot of attention. And also a button to activate the camera since every vehicle has poor rear visibility now.

'nuff said

The WWW is older than the EU, though the general public became aware of it in the same year the Maastricht Treaty was signed. The principle of hypertext is older than the WWW, though. I had hypertext software on DOS, it "only" didn't link to other computers. That's an obvious extension, though. And it literally is obvious, because people were doing similar things with Unix, via rcp and uucp. For example, there were automated UUCP info gateways. You'd send them mail and they'd send you dynamic data.

In what way is pointing out that Musk is a Nazi a defense of a POTUS who is also a Nazi?

" In some cases, the AI model will generate further copies by how it responds to prompts, "

In no cases, you mean. It creates some close variants which might be considered derivative works, though.

Evaporative cooling. The water is lost to the atmosphere. The total power budget for your query includes a percentage of the energy it took to train the model. Just serving your query isn't all that expensive, but the training time is.

For me, the game I cannot play is Rust. Yes you can run it just fine, and yes there are maybe a couple of servers you can play on, and they have anticheat disabled. There are popular anticheat systems which work on Linux, EAC being one of them, and I've got a lot of games with online components and anticheat which do work very well. I was surprised by the percentage of my various game libraries* which could be easily installed via Lutris and work just fine. Most of them have very good performance as well.

A handful of Steam games don't run and more don't run well without Proton-GE, but a lot of games work without any addons at all. And speaking of addons, they are mostly easy to manage using steamtinkerlaunch, which supports both Vortex and MO2. There are definitely game mods which don't work well with Wine or Proton, mostly ones which have very specific runtime requirements. Some of those don't run well even with the runtimes installed with wine/protontricks.

* For a while there, Humble Bundles were awesome, and a lot of those games were on services which I never would have otherwise patronized.