Narethii t1_jb3gstn wrote

No mention of telecommuting? WFH is still a considerable part of the NA office job work force, I know MANY people who went from 30-60 minute one way daily commutes to WFH. It's the most significant decrease in my use and my wife's of motor vehicles by far


Narethii t1_j4v3vlm wrote

This entire sub is just nonsense and confusion. I like to categorize this type of post as nihilist motivation, "secretly the world sucks and you don't have agency so go do that thing you want to do". As a front page only user I hate how popular this subreddit is.


Narethii t1_iw34r19 wrote

This graph makes a lot of sense to me, as much as people hate derivative work, sequels and adaptations are generally well recieved since they are often based on source material that has been proven to do well.

Of course a show based off a popular property will likely be popular itself


Narethii t1_ivfr1oa wrote

This is just straight up non-sense, all of the companies founded personally by Musk have been immeasurable failures. Outside of acquiring Tesla, PayPal and SpaceX, and selling technology that was already invented or was already a couple of years from being marketable most of Musk's insane ideas have been abject failures (the boring company, Tesla autopilot, Hyperloop, etc.), Are in research hell (cybertruck, neurolink), or are impossible to scale without causing a mess of the environment (42k near earth orbit satellites that are needed to make Starlink equivalent to 2015 broadband).

The markets described already have robots designed for them that are already in use, Japan has had nursing home assistant robots that can already assist in patient care for almost 2 decades. Existing Bot nets, programmable robot arms, warehouse autos, Machine vision algorithms that can accurately inspect thousands of parts per second to identify manufacturing defects, etc. are way more detrimental than a clumsy humanoid robot that will in all likelihood require a human pilot to do anything complex.


Narethii t1_ivfp998 wrote

This is 100% fear mongering non-sense the human form is almost entirely a detriment to most of not all manual labour, unless we are making these machines persistence hunters it's better to just make purpose built machines. I mean Baxter has existed for 10 years and it's not replaced robot arms, conveyor belts and machine vision air ejection systems.

Companies don't hire humans because their body is a good shape they hire them because machines are not as good at making general intelligence decisions as a human is. People are already regularly replaced by machines, making them humanoid just makes it easier for people to compete


Narethii t1_iufg8hw wrote

If that was a concern birds wouldn't do it in the first place, birds have been using sheddings from other animals since before humans domesticated dogs. This behavior would have been an evolutionary dead end of animal fur was an inherently dangerous material. The real issue people dose their pets with pesticides and baby birds are notoriously vulnerable to pesticides


Narethii t1_ir642io wrote

Building a bunch of small power generation stations using renewables is way way more efficient as local power generation suffers fewer transmission losses, and way more resilient than 1 mega facility supplied by a single fuel line.

I really hope that future generations don't continue to suffer the same brain damage so many pro-fossil fuels people do now and simply look at this time of brain rot with derision.


Narethii t1_ir63924 wrote

They are now cheap (not even relatively cheap, most renewables are in par with fossil fuel power generation in terms of life cycle cost), and can be paired with a lot of different energy storage solutions that are relatively safe and easy to maintain.

Even without the new energy crisis it just doesn't make economic sense to add new fossil fuel generation to meet an energy gap