I don't mean to be an apologist for dieselgate - I'm not, it was scummy and I'm glad VW execs ended up in prison - but all carmakers had illegally high diesel emissions.
VW weren't even close to the worst for it, either. Fiat, Hyundai, and Renault-Nissan (they partner for engine designs a lot) were the worst, VW was bizarrely one of the least over the legal limit for most engine designs.
We just affiliate it with VW more because they were not only the first to be tested, but the VW executives admitted to using cheat devices, whereas most others denied it. VW took the fall for an entire shady industry.
I, too, think humans become incapable of learning from their mistakes when they become wealthy.
IMO it's a side effect of money being seen as the most important thing in life and the measure of success. Our culture says the more money you have, the greater a success you are.
With that in mind, imagine you're a rich person. In your mind, that makes you a success.
You hear people with less money than you giving their opinions of what you should do, and you think "well why would I listen to these people? If they were as clever as me, they'd have as much money (read: success) as me. They do not, ergo their ideas must be worse than mine."
In the mind of a mega-wealthy person, any normal person trying to give advice is met with the same reaction that a minimum wage toilet cleaner would be if they tried to give life advice to a median earner. "Huh? Really? You're trying to give me life advice? Lmao. Ok buddy, sure."
It completely explains why so many wealthy people surround themselves in yes men. It not necessarily that they hate any pushback (although of course it sometimes is this), it's that they won't take it seriously from someone who, by their perceived metric of success, is less qualified to call the shots.
And you know what? It's not actually a completely unreasonable deduction. It's just based on a flawed and extremely fucked up premise. Any person thinking clearly of course realises that there's so much more to life than wealth.
Fully open and accessible: Fully open-source release of model weights, training hyperparameters, datasets, and code, fostering innovation and collaboration within the AI community.
That's actually pretty good. Seems to be open source as the OSI defines it, rather than the much more common "this model is open source, but the dataset is a secret".
Not really. The UK is very anti-Musk and very anti-Trump.
Ireland and the UK being the only ones to grow is likely due to the way Tesla delivers Right-Hand Drive cars - they deliver them as one large batch each quarter rather than constantly trickling them out like LHD cars.
If you look at UK and Irish sales figures across multiple months, they swing between being up and down, depending on when RHD shipments come. Overall Tesla is down (and the UK even before Musk's recent actions bought far fewer Tesla cars than France or Germany)
You're right. People say "1984" to mean "dystopia" or "things I don't like about modern society".
Tangentially related, there was a survey a while back that found most people who say they have read 1984 haven't actually read it. So that may be part of it.
Personally, if we're going with the classic dystopian novels, I think we're more aligned with:
The anti-intellectualism/distraction from the real issues like we see in Fahrenheit 451. Arguably we have already started the book-burning. (Tbf, there's also practically no pre-big brother material in 1984, so clearly they went down the same route, although Orwell didn't go into that as deeply as Bradbury)
Keeping people docile with an endless stream of entertainment content and consumerism like in Brave New World.
...than we are with the "Oppression through fear and brainwashing from an all-powerful, all-seeing government" that we see in 1984.
But even then there are significant differences. E.g. unlike in Brave New World, there's no government-provided Soma drug to further placate us. Well, not unless you believe the chemtrail conspiracy theories lol
My birthday today too, although I'm unfortunately not 25...
I didn't have a PS2 (Dreamcast and Xbox in my household), but I do remember frequently staying at my cousin's house and playing NFS, GTA, Simpsons hit and run, and SpongeBob battle for bikini bottom on his
We can, there's just less demand for them. Sony was among the last holdouts for small phones with their compact series, but they stopped because they were their worst selling models.
Even Apple stopped selling their small SE model (that was basically iPhone 5 sized) despite it being the cheapest iPhone to get your hands on, because it sold terribly.
Small phones is something the tech community says it cares about, but the market has proven that the average person doesn't care. Same as the headphone jack and microSD slot.
I don't like it either, but phone companies aren't deliberately leaving money on the table. If they thought small phones would sell gangbusters, they'd bring them back.
Like they said, it could lead to more people driving. Not only are they uncertain, is it likely to be by an amount that would be more than the emissions saved?
Let's look at this from another angle. What do you think we should do? Every government on Earth suddenly decides to destroy every car on the planet within the next few months?
Like I said, cars will continue to exist for a while. It makes no sense to put your hands up and say "well, cars are bad. But if they can't be eliminated completely then we shouldn't attempt to reduce vehicle emissions at all".
This change is a good one. I've said it already, but you're letting perfect be the enemy of good.
No they aren't. They're saying smarter traffic systems are an improvement over what we have now. I've looked in the article and nowhere do they say cars aren't a problem, or that emissions is down to traffic lights not cars.
I see so many examples on here and on Reddit of people letting perfect be the enemy of good.
Whether we like it or not, cars will be around for a while. It makes no sense to put zero effort into improving efficiency in the meantime. You don't have to be so all-or-nothing.
I think the person you're responding to is suggesting that the "honeypot" never routes you to the internet, it only routes you to some pages it has stored locally that tell you to not connect to random SSIDs.
That's fun, informative, and harmless.
I know. That portion of their comment is fair enough. It's the following statement that I took issue with.
You kinda get what you deserve if you connect to unprotected WiFi that you don’t own/setup yourself.
I'm not sure I agree with this line of thinking. Most people are clueless when it comes to security, that doesn't mean it's fine to spy on them or scam them and just say "well you connected to an unprotected network, so it's your fault. You got what you deserved."
On a place like Lemmy that's generally tech literate, you'll probably find no shortage of people thinking that.
But would they feel the same if a car mechanic scammed them by taking advantage of them not being knowledgeable about cars?
Because GOG doesn't want to support it. They'd rather the community do it.