flagrant_taco

11 ms·

61.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
The open web is dead if the only option is to base every browser on a Google core. How do specs fit into this if every browser is just a UI shell around chrome? Where is the competition driving innovation of the web platform when the only c
62.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
Exactly, in that model the only way to build a browser is to depend on someone else to implement the specs. It's not feasible to build a new browser, at best you can start with what Google implemented, including proprietary features, a
63.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
I think this is actually a modern misunderstanding of the original benefits of computers. Computers were originally designed as a tool, they allowed us to work more efficiently but weren't directly taking over doing the actual work. A
64.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
We aren't going to see browser competition unless and until we fundamentally rethink what the internet should be. The specifications are simply too complex to foster any meaningful competition. There's too much ground to cover pla
65.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
There's a big gap between the amount of oilwwe use today and zero oil, we can reduce without stopping. I think your point leads down the path of arguing that we have too many people on the planet though. If we can sustainably feed ever
66.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
To what end? What will more data do when it's inevitably going to be incomplete and largely based on modeling? We won't ever understand the problem space of the entire ecosystem well enough to make a complete solution. But there a
67.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
I think we may have a difference in degree when it comes to what we think may be coming. I don't expect the planet to burst into flames over night, but we have already done unimaginable damage to soil, water, and life on this planet. I
68.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
Oh companies are absolutely to blame, but so are the politicians we'd need to actually regulate them. Enforcing regulations requires quite a few steps first, from defining the scope and likely granting new authority to regulators to ac
69.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
Jevon's Paradox is a thought experiment focused on increased efficiency not decreased demand. History is full of examples where a decrease on demand didn't lead to an increase in ridiculous uses for the technology.
70.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
I'm curious, why is this the goal rather than something like a decreased dependance on automobiles? Any concerns that population growth may mean that a lifetime from now we have 50% electric vehicles but still a higher total number of
71.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
Defining standards of living in this way is very short term focused. If we reduce energy demand now but avoid a power grid collapse a decade down the road, is that better or worse for standard of living? And if we really are meant to belie
72.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
Solar and wind are absolutely limited, both by environmental conditions that change the energy potential and by our ability to store energy. Neither can handle surge use as well either, we can't make more wind or sunshine when everyone
73.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
How do we know these exist of we don't know how to access our use them? Without access we can only estimate the reserves, and without a way to use it we can't calculate the potential energy creation or storage. We really are screw
74.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
Creating the Federal Reserve was a fundamental change. Confiscating gold then pegging the US dollar to a gold-backed value was a fundamental change. Getting rid of the gold standard and going full fiat sad a fundamental change. The economic
75.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
Or entire system is based on predictable GDP growth. It impacts nearly every part of your life in some way. Do you have any debt? Or use money? Or pay taxes?do you have a job? Did you know that oil consumption grows at the same rate as GDP?
76.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
I sincerely hope that we aren't at a point where most people's guiding principles are minimizing their own poorness or misery. Those should be a given and self interest is backed into us, but we're in for a world of hurt if t
77.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
I'm actually arguing the opposite. We don't know precisely that any of the suggested changes I listed would make a clear impact on climate change. My point is that, regardless of what happens with climate change, we could cut oil
78.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
I'd argue that an economy and society built on the framework of terrible economic inequality is fundamentally unable to fix said problems. I expect we would have a lot of agreement related to fixing that system to better serve the aver
79.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
An easier first step before nuclear is reducing our power requirements. This one gets laughed out of the room both because we don't think purple will accept it and because there's a direct correlation between GDP growth and energy
80.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
The economic model is going to change one way or another. A model designed around perpetual growth will always fail, and there are already plenty of cracks showing. A major economic change sounds impossible, but we've done it in the US
81.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
It doesn't necessarily have to be done through further government intervention. Simply removing government protections and subsidies for industry would go a long way. That's definitely not a complete solution (if one exists), but
82.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
That opens up a whole apndoras box of whether a reduction is approach can lead to a complete understanding of complex systems. I'll leave that for another thread, that's a deep rabbit whole full of mostly theoretical debate (thou
83.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
What you're describing is the path to inevitable collapse. If people will never be able to give up convenience or growth then we really are doomed, tech advantages only slow down that runaway train. I don't actually think it'
84.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
The aggregate data is often more useful in commercial use cases, but plenty of use cases need the indivual data as well. Private investigators, three letter agencies, and any company wanting to send mailers to my new address when I move all
85.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
The debate over exact causes has always felt misguided to me. The planet is extremely complex, human impact on the planet is largely based on estimates and modeling, and at the end of the day an understanding of why it's getting hotter
86.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
I'm not really sure what would be considered cheap vs valuable here so I don't have a great answer there. My point was only that individusl data is collected and sold often, it must be valuable or there wouldn't be a market.
87.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
I'm not so sure that Google's data is even their moat, their monopoly on everything related to ads might be the main thing keeping that so afloat.
88.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
Individual data is extremely valuable, they wouldn't collect and store it individually if all they wanted was the aggregate. Identity-specific data is sold all the time for everything from advertising to credit scores and what would ot
89.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
Seeing a price up front is just a different business model and localization could be easily handled with a setting on your account. Neither is tech-dependent, both could have worked over SMS too. Real-time mapping would be tricker if that&#
90.
by flagrant_taco 3y ago
I assume it varied greatly by region, but my experience was that it was extremely difficult to find workers during the pandemic response. It seemed like a combination of fear and restrictions, plus free money at least in the US. I saw hour

More ›