It is, on hacker news, easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism it seems.
This is echoing a term made by Varoufakis about an increasing amount of money being held by a smaller and smaller group, not a return to literal peasant existence. It’s not feudalism, it’s ‘neo-feudalism’.
The argument that labour can move is true, except where it can’t. Look at the entire towns of miners made irrelevant with no replacement to their jobs. Sure you might say they can move half way across the country to clean toilets but they have skills, a family and houses somewhere else.
Where the argument of a feudal analogy really rings true is the increasing attempt to do back to extraction of rent for everything. Subscriptions for everything, including homes are becoming more and more normal. Are we really okay with a world in this form?
Good for the time but dated. When your negative is the big it doesn’t matter as much but it’s absolutely not as sharp as more modern constructions.
It’s also arguably a step down to use his printed body versus the original Mamiya press in terms of functionality other than reduced weight. Still an impressive design though.
> Regulations can be bad but they can also stop environmental disasters from happening.
It makes me wonder how bad the situation is, when you feel the need to start your sentence with 'regulations can be bad', while corporations fight you for their right to release PFAS into your drinking water sources.
While the story is interesting one thing struck me about the writing. The author for some reason mentions the wording in some eBay auctions:
‘“This Redbox lot is a must-have addition to any movie collection,” one of the sellers wrote, while another promised, “From action-packed blockbusters to heartwarming family favorites, this collection has something for everyone.”’
As someone who has seen the use of eBay’s questionable ‘help’ tool, this is clearly the AI generated slop auto description. I find it interesting that someone writing an entire article has taken it as real sentiment and not just someone taking the easiest way to try and make some money on used dvds.
Unfortunately selling things online, I found these meaningless and obnoxious AI hype descriptions to bring in a lot more interested buyers than a simple straightforward description of the item.
I had a bunch of items taking up space in my garage that just wouldn’t sell with good photos and a clear description…. But sold immediately when I let GPT-4 write an (obnoxious sounding, to me) ad hyping it up and telling buyers why they needed it.
It reminds me of my dog who refuses to chew a bone unless I fake act really excited about it like I want to chew it myself.
I quite dislike this because it appears to be AI emotionally manipulating people into buying products they don’t really need or want.
> I quite dislike this because it appears to be AI emotionally manipulating people into buying products they don’t really need or want.
That's the definition of advertising in general, AI is just the copywriter in your example.
I view almost all advertisements as a form of microaggressions. A company is stealing my attention without my consent and attempting to manipulate me on a subconscious level.
Over time, the cost of advertising will go down and ad sophistication will increase. The endgame is ads in your eyeballs 100% of the day causing you to take actions that are against your self interest. The next generation ad blocker will be a hypothalamus implant - ads will be unavoidable, so the only option will be to block your emotional response to then.
That’s a great concept for a cyberpunk short story.
I feel the same that advertising is an invasive attack trying to steal my autonomy and resources. Currently, my family and I are mostly able to not experience ads in our lives, but it is becoming increasingly difficult and expensive to do so.
It’s a shorthand for news articles intended for laypeople but it gets the point across; no natural processes yet found break down these compounds and in small but measurable quantities they build up in our environment. It’s not practical to say, treat all sewage effluent or refuse going to recycling / landfill / incineration to break them down so they build up and we don’t really know what they will end up doing. So for most practical purposes, yes they’re not going anywhere.
This is echoing a term made by Varoufakis about an increasing amount of money being held by a smaller and smaller group, not a return to literal peasant existence. It’s not feudalism, it’s ‘neo-feudalism’.
The argument that labour can move is true, except where it can’t. Look at the entire towns of miners made irrelevant with no replacement to their jobs. Sure you might say they can move half way across the country to clean toilets but they have skills, a family and houses somewhere else.
Where the argument of a feudal analogy really rings true is the increasing attempt to do back to extraction of rent for everything. Subscriptions for everything, including homes are becoming more and more normal. Are we really okay with a world in this form?