Yeah that’s pretty dystopian. Something worse hasn’t been done with it probably just because many bad actors haven’t been aware its an option.

Very satisfying

But I don’t want my devices to be bombs

I didn’t take the image to be showing a macbook, it could just as easily be my computer or probably many others.

You’re right, doesn’t sound great. In the example they shared, sounds like the issue wasn’t that the car couldn’t drive around the fire truck, but that it couldn’t break a programming rule about crossing into a lane that would normally be opposing traffic. Once given the “ok” to follow such a route, the car handled it on its own, the human doesn’t actually drive it.

I could imagine a scenario where you need one human operator for every two vehicles. That’s still reducing labor by 50%.

Obviously they want it to be better than that, they want it to be one operator per ten vehicles or no operator at all.

And the fundamental problem with these systems is they will be owned by big corporations, and any gained efficiency will be consumed by the corporation, not enjoyed by the worker or passed on to the customer.

But I think there’s true value to be found there. Imagine a transportation cooperative - we’re a thousand households, we don’t all need our own car, but we need a car sometimes. We pool our resources and have a small fleet that minimizes our cost and environmental impact, and potentially drives more safely than human drivers.

Seems like a company that initially differentiated itself by hyping 3D printing, and once they realized that won’t work they’ve got to pivot without spooking everyone.

Every business’s biggest expense is labor. Skilled labor costs more. The people in charge like it when you save money.

I think it’s wrong. But only because the interests of the people who own the machines and businesses diverge from the worker’s interests. I’d like to see more worker cooperatives. If the workers own the machines, then it’s good when things are automated.

I also don’t believe anything will ever be truly automated, or that it’s a good idea to try.

All that to say we don’t have to resort to an explanation of “managers must hate engineers” to understand why they would want to eliminate positions.

I don’t think it’s just managers saying hey we could automate such and such a thing away. It’s human nature to think “how could I improve this” which almost immediately leads to “if I get this right it could mean no work at all”

This is pretty exciting

Won’t this be a challenge for Ukraine? I got the impression they rely on consumer drones a lot

Do you use an ad blocker or privacy extension? I’ll just throw out there I don’t think it’s right, but I’ve had to disable adblock to get some banking site stuff to work

?

The article I shared is about how solar is now the cheapest form of power. So that is what’s happening.

I’m saying it does matter. When you go to a business and say you can buy a widget for $1000, or for $500, and they both do the same thing, the business will choose the cheaper one. Sure, lobbying will get businesses some favors, loosen some regulation, get some subsidies, but at a certain point it’s not enough, the economics take over.

You’re right that people have been thinking about and working on renewable energy for a long time. However what’s only become true very recently is that it’s cheaper to generate energy using renewable sources than to use fossil fuels. That’s a massive milestone because when a new power source is built it will more likely than not be renewable.

People making sacrifices is important, but what if you weren’t only giving people the opportunity to help the environment, but also to improve their bottom line? Makes the pitch a lot easier and helps us to build momentum in the right direction.

I don’t agree with you, but also if I did, what then? If we don’t believe it’s possible for things to get better do we just lay down and die?

You’re right, we’ve got to get rid of fossil fuel. As one example, the article talks about how energy storage has reduced the need for gas peaker plants. In California in April the power required from those plants was half what it’s been in April the prior three years.

Still plenty of progress that needs to be made, but what’s notable is that it’s now cheaper for a business to turn to green energy and storage to solve a problem. There’s not an incentive to build new polluting tech. So while the impact of climate change is going to get worse (because those emissions and warming are already baked in) the business argument for fossil fuel is no longer viable.

Yes, we need more storage and generation. The author didn’t say we’re all good and nothing more needs to be done. What’s noteworthy is that renewable energy is cheaper than CO2 emitting, and battery storage is cheaper than peaker plants. (And grid battery can come from things like salt, sand, brick along with better known components like hydro storage, doesn’t have to be rare earth elements)

It’s ok to acknowledge when good things happen while also recognizing bad things.

With respect, I think you’re projecting a discussion with a different person onto this article.

You’re right, the climate is going to get worse before it gets better. You’re right, the impacts of climate change will disproportionately affect poor and underdeveloped areas. We can’t make that go away with positive thinking, and it’s not enough for humans as a species to survive, we need to focus on reducing suffering while we’re turning the ship.

What I took away from this article is that the market forces for cheap renewable power and the means to store it are now stronger than the forces for CO2 emitting power. And those forces are moving faster than predicted. That’s good, and it’s ok to talk about something good when it’s true!

People who have been paying attention and care about others have good reason to be wary about the narrative “oh, everything is going to be fine” because that’s what industry and politicians have been saying for a long time instead of taking needed action.

We’re at a point where most people recognize climate change is real, and they can see it’s effects. We’re also at a point where many people don’t have hope for the situation. It’s dangerous to tell people “shit’s fucked and there’s nothing you can do about it” because they might believe you and do nothing.

I’ve seen the compass, but in real life conversation when people say left or right they don’t exclusively mean economic views. For example, access to abortion or LGBT rights are generally seen as supported by the left and opposed by the right.

You’re right it’s reductive, and really there are many dimensions to political thought.

I don’t think that’s accurate, there’s a social axis from left to right too.