RikerT_USS_Lolipop

RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_ja7f3pz wrote

>Anime and animation is grueling work isn't it? Not to mention the labor practices and crunch are soul crushing.

None of that has to do with animation. It's strictly a problem with Capitalism. The owners of those studios want to squeeze ever last possible cent out of their labor. They could very easily pay their artists appropriately and not assign more than 40 hours of work per week. The end product will be slightly more expensive, but all that needs to be done is slash the amount of trash shovelware anime being produced so that those eyeballs are more tightly concentrated and ad revenue goes up enough to compensate.

If the workers weren't enamored with having that specific job because it has been their dream their whole life, and if they had the ability to walk away from a tilted negotiation table, then all those problems would evaporate.

So using the excuse, "ah, it's fine in this case because that's a shitty job" doesn't work. All jobs are going to be that shitty soon enough. And it never has anything to do with the actual work.

22

RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_j1l3m50 wrote

Yea, just the act that something unusual is being done will put them on alert. And they will notice the presents are weak. That's not something a child will forget to notice. This tip is like saying, "If you're an employer short changing your employee, you should chat with them as you hand them their check to stretch it out for time."

−6

RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_j0jnkfh wrote

The M8 was perfect in every way. I never had any overheating problem, probably because I didn't play games on it. But every single thing about it was exactly what I wanted. I bought an M9 plus and it was worse in every single way. It's like they found out about Market Segmentation and then destroyed their own product.

6

RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_ixek2yo wrote

Not necessarily. It's taken as an axiom in Capitalism that you need competition to drive innovation and bring prices down for consumers. But it's not the competition doing that. It's the individuals in charge of those companies deciding to do those things. They could easily choose to do those things without competition forcing their hand but, generally speaking, companies are run by greedy psychopaths.

The leadership of Neuralink probably isn't in it strictly for the money. They want to be rich of course but they also understand the nature and implications of the Singularity as well as anyone in this subreddit.

Then there are the drawbacks of competition. The best minds are being scattered around. Venture capital is being split. Work is being duplicated. There are a lot of inefficiencies inherent in a market system.

−30

RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_ix1nska wrote

That would be great. Have you been in a public school in the last two decades?

Also, you can do that remotely too. Or forget the remote part completely and just focus on the fact that we could have our top .001 percentile of teachers giving lessons to everyone via video lecture and electronic practice and testing while they still go to the physical building and get babysat by the current crop of teachers.

1

RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_iwzoptz wrote

Kids should be capable of staying home alone from age 8+.

Daycare can still exist for kids younger than that. As well as families socializing and agreeing to watch each others kids in exchanges. The families I know already work out agreements where one stay at home mom watches the family friends kids after school every day.

16 means through the end of university. Those classes can also be done online with a small handful of standardized classes. Professors could support multiple times as many students as they currently do if lectures and grading were taken care of for them.

3

RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_iwznyca wrote

why doesn't supply increase? Is it locked or something?

If the general population has more money then there's more incentive than ever to produce more stuff. Also, this topic is a little more advanced, but in economics there is a thing called the Utilization Rate. A huge percentage of our Capital [machines and production] are sitting idle.

6

RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_iwz9pnq wrote

I'm skeptical. we could have replaced K-16 education with online learning over 20 years ago. And it could have blown our current system out of the water. Imagine the top 1000 chemistry teachers in the nation were tasked with sculpting the perfect curriculum. They could have used automated reinforcement feedback systems to individualize curriculums to individual students.

But we didn't do that. Mostly because the people we ask whether that would be a good move to make tell us it would never work and it would be a catastophe because their jobs depend on it not happening. Office middle managers have been absolutely adamant that working from home would be terrible for productivity. Oops! turns out it's better for every single party [business, manager, worker] in every single metric we can think to measure.

Humans could already be living in a post-forced work paradise but we just won't fucking do it.

18

RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_iwz903c wrote

UBI is not a choice between working or letting the government control you. You can work regardless.

And just think about what you're suggesting. They will threaten to take away you're UBI, and that is somehow worse than it not existing in the first place? That's like telling a homeless man that the government will offer him a house but expect him to work a job, and the government shouldn't go down that path because then the homeless man will be dependent on the government to not be homeless.

12

RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_iu6vo3m wrote

At the beginning of the Iraq war they televised air strikes in black and green night vision. It was called Operation Shock and Awe. They seriously tried to turn that war into an action movie for people to watch on tv and get hyped. They also got Godsmack for Navy commercials.

It's not that there is something wrong with you. They know exactly what they are doing.

8

RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_isz7uwu wrote

He is very much a "don't tax the rich, just grow the pie instead" type. Any time someone asks him about growing wealth inequality he falls back to that. So if your conclusion is that wealth equalizing is bad, then you're going to work backwards and believe that systemic failures of Capitalism don't exist, and how can you support that idiotic notion? By believing technology isn't causing the game to be continuously and increasingly rigged against the little guy.

It's a human response. And humans are kinda shit.

13