Every time I see posts like this I remember a frequent argument I had in the early 2000’s.
Every time I talked with photography students (I worked at an art school) or a general photography enthusiast, I got the same smug predictions about digital photography. The resolution sucked, the color sucked, the artist doesn’t have enough control, etc. They all assured me that digital photography might be nice for casual vacation photos and maybe a few specialty applications but no way, no how, not even when hell freezes over would any serious photographer ever consider digital.
At the time I would think back to my annoying grade school discussions with teachers who assured me that (dot matrix) printers just sucked. Serious writing was done by hand and if you didn’t know cursive you might as well be illiterate.
For some reasons people keep forgetting that technology marches on. The dumb glitches that are so easy to make fun of now, will get addressed. There are billions of dollars pouring into AI development. Every major company and country is developing them. The pay rates for AI developer jobs attract huge amounts of people to solve those problems.
And up to now we have zero indication that the current approach isn’t a dead end. Bill Gates, for instance, thinks that GPT-4 is a development plateau: heise.de/-9337989
It’s possible that the current $100 billion market size of AI and all the AI job openings are completely misplaced but that’s indication that a lot of people have pretty high expectations that AI will continue to grow.
Ah, yes, famous expert in artificial intelligence and machine learning, Bill Gates. I’m personally curious what Taylor Swift thinks about Chat GPT 5, myself. That girl’s got a lot of money, which means she must be smart and has smart opinions on topics like generative AI and the efficacy of currently undeveloped LLMs.
Certainly, but none of those technologies completely replaced things. The existing way of doing things became hobbies and remain the preference over the technology which disrupted the field.
Not to mention, technologies will sometimes flop, only to resurface later in a completely different package. The PDA was maybe popular for a year? But now we all have smartphones which effectively capture that concept. The Wii U failed, but the Switch has been wildly popular.
It’s probably premature to say that AI will completely fail, but also that AI will completely replace everything. I just used a Polaroid camera this past weekend at a wedding, and it was enjoyable in a way digital cameras or phones wouldn’t have been. I still write things out at work, particularly if I’m trying to wrap my head around some math or a difficult concept. Typing it out doesn’t work as well.
I think it is safe to say that there are some things AI will never be able to replace, just like there are some things digital cameras couldn’t replace, nor our phones.
There’s either the “it’ll never work” take or the “it’ll destroy the industry!” take, and both are kinda childish. New technologies are tools, nothing more, nothing less. Learn to use them and they’ll make your life easier. Integrate them if they’re threatening your livelihood. Learn and adapt, it’s how progress has always worked.
I’m guessing this argument has been going on longer than either of us can remember.
There was a long time when guns were considered interesting toys but not something a sane person would take onto the battlefield; especially not without some sort of backup. Hell, the “three musketeers” were more known for their fencing than their firearms skill.
I’m sure back in the day some chucklehead complained that papyrus was cute but anything important had to be carved in stone tablet.
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn’t work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !pixaraimemes
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn’t work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !pixaraimemes
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn’t work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !pixaraimemes
As a querty user, I know most of my speed typing comes down to muscle memory, but dvorak is a more sensible layout from what I’ve heard. The problem with dvorak is that most people, including myself, are too used to the old layout to want to momentarily slow down and learn something that would be faster in the long run. So I’m never gonna fault someone for either choice, but… Switching back and forth is some psycho the-voices-moaned-me-to-do-it shit.
I use Dvorak. I typed around 70 wpm in Qwerty, and now I’m up to around 95 wpm in Dvorak. Was it worth it? I dunno. I got up to a good speed (like 30 wpm) in like a month, but it took a good couple of years to reach my current speed. The problem is that I switched from being a programmer to teaching programming, so now I have a bit of trouble every time I try to show my students something on their computers. No way I’m switching back to Qwerty, but I’m not sure if the switch was really worth it. If I were an author, a secretary, someone who actually typed fast all day long it’d probably be worth it, but not for what I actually do.
The worst thing they do is trick hordes of people into thinking they’re informed because they read a headline posted with a reaction image and an agenda.
I don’t hate subscription based services if they’re priced fairly and make sense.
Paying monthly for a service that then starts giving you less, adds more premium plans, introduces ads, etc. is garbage.
Paying for a game, then having to pay a monthly fee to play (WoW, for example), is garbage.
Paying for software, but then having to pay monthly to use the software, is garbage.
Paying for software, but then having to pay monthly to be allowed to contact support (Blue Iris), is garbage.
But paying for things like Spotify, where you get access to pretty much all songs as they release, have no limit on how much you listen to, and it has a fair student pricing or family pricing, that’s fine. Way better than paying per song.
I mean shit, if I paid for every song I have in my library on Spotify, I’d owe $1430. My Spotify is $17 per month, spit between 4 people, so I pay $4.25. I can either pay for every song in my library and not add any more, or pay for Spotify for 28 years and continue growing my library…
The economics of the world are such that people need to be paid for the content they produce. Having a direct relationship between me as the consumer and them as the producer is the way we don’t get shit like all of the ad-based spyware that surrounds shit like Facebook. It won’t completely prevent it, but it gives a good business plan for it not to happen.
I’d vastly prefer something that didn’t require some megacorp as evil as Amazon. But… this could actually make as much sense as is possible with our current economic system.
WoW and other MMOs are not just games with slapped on subscription costs. It is a very specific subtype of games which have much higher maintenance cost than an arena shooter. There is a reason these games get shutdown when certain financial thresholds get passed beyond let’s do something more profitable.
I’d rather have access to pretty much every song on demand for $4 per month and not own it, than pay per song.
I pay $4.25 per month for Spotify. That’s $51 per year. I have access to pretty much every song, or I could buy 39 songs to own instead.
I save more than 39 songs per month. Financially it makes no sense to buy them. Especially if you consider I get bored of some songs, and never listen to them again.
The way I look at it, is I don’t pay to listen to the music, I pay for the convenience.
Most music I listen to is on YouTube, where if I wanted to, I could just download it and “own” the song for free. However, in the interest of saving time, letting Spotify create playlists based on what I listen to, I just pay a monthly fee. Not to mention that I can share my playlists on multiple devices, whereas if I download music, I can’t.
I also have a family plan with all spots filled up, so that’s 6 people listening to all their music for $20/mo CAD. Far superior to buying an album or individual songs.
Wait. Are you the person in that conversation? So you are basically putting this out there for everyone to see… A private conversation with another mod? If you are mod of this community you should really leave. This is highly unprofessional and extremely unethical. If you act this way why should the users be held to another standard?
Whatever the other mod did or not is not something you shluld be spreading to other people like this. Who would want to become mod here now when they see how you act?
You are taking this way too seriously tbh. This is a shit posting community. The guy went around posting about feet and left when advised not to do so.
Jo kinda hits deep now. Already made a screenshot of the post so if they delete it I will repost it.
By the way I was not in any way aggressive at all it was just that I had a different understanding on what shitposting is and I took the r/okbuddyretard approach instead of a more r/shitposting approach.
I knew that my posts were shit but they also said that I was supposed to post something which I didn’t think I had to do because I assumed it was the plan to reopen the community under mod enforced control and not keep it unfree with unoriginal content.
“Unprofessional” as if being a shitpost mod on lemmy requires or deserves any level of professionalism. It’s the furthest thing away from a profession. You’re hilarious.
What drives me up the wall is when it just links to a scanned image of the menu they used to have, so instead of a full sized menu, you have to pinch and zoom and swipe around on your phone. What’s the fucking point? I went to one and the menu was FOUR PAGES LONG like that! If I hadn’t been promising my daughter I’d take her, I would have walked out.
Folding phone works well for this. Kinda sucks that you need an $1800 device to have a decent menu viewing experience. I’m more miffed that they expect my reception to be a given. Towers go down, congestion happens, give me a physical menu!
I always liked the other one where Garfield was left in but all his thought bubbles were removed, so it just became a deadpan documentary about a slightly unhinged loser’s life with a cat.
Holy shit guys. If they wanted to have that requirement let them have it, if people wanted to fulfill it and join its good for them. If they wanted to defederate, thats ok too.
People think I am full of it when I say that my household income (largish household with kids) is a quarter million a year and we are basically living like we are middle class. Money just doesn’t go as far as it used to.
As a millennial, I never would have imagined working my way up to this point only to find I can’t even buy a house. Oh sure, I could make the bare minimum down payment and get stuck with a super high mortgage payment, but if I lose my job or become disabled or unable to work, we would have no way to pay for it.
Groceries, housing, and insurance costs have more than doubled for us since 2019.
Same. My wife and I are in the process of trying to buy a house over an hour from town, because it’s the only way we’ll ever be able to afford one, and it’s still more than what our landlord paid for the house we’re renting. Housing prices have tripled in the last 8 years here. They doubled in the last two years alone. The house we’re renting would cost a million dollars to buy today and our landlord has a $1000 per month mortgage on it since she bought it right before the housing explosion. It’s pretty wacky that you can become a millionaire just by having been alive and financially stable a few years earlier, while everyone else is destined to be poor for the rest of their lives, even if they’re making a quarter million dollars per year.
It’s a normal-ass 1960’s neighborhood that your parents would have paid normal-ass prices for. The job market here exploded over the last 20 years, so there’s just too many people and not enough land. I’m one of those people, so it’s not like I don’t contribute to the problem.
There are neither too many people nor not enough land, but too many houses from the 60s passed down with initial property tax values and too many NIMBYs preventing new construction of large apartment buildings.
There are tons of big skyrise apartment complexes and dozens more in the works. But they all get labeled “luxury apartments”, despite basically being tiny little rectangles with no windows except for a sliding glass door at the end, and they cost just as much as a house to rent. The more traditional apartments have mostly been converted to condos and they’re also very expensive. It’s just crazy expensive here, despite your choices! Lots of people commute for over an hour each way and then it’s still a half million dollars for a decent house. You have to live at least an hour and a half in the right direction to get something for less.
People live in worse apartments they can afford, so they buy a luxury apartment. Their apartment is now open to a person who could afford that apartment, but not the luxury apartment, so theirs gets filled. This repeats down the chain of quality/desirability/cost.
Every new apartment adds supply, thus adding negative price pressure.
While it’s not quite as much, I’m in what was once the cheapest town within 30 miles in any direction, and our housing prices have gone up 800% in the last 20 years, compared to the 1000% in the other city I mentioned.
Rental prices are up about 1000% since then too. My first apartment was $400/mo in the early 2000s. That same apartment is now $3500/mo, and it hasn’t even been renovated.
Is 1000% a reasonable increase to you over 20 years? If wages had gone up similarly, I might agree. It’s pretty clear to me that communities prioritize high earning tax bases over their existing citizenry in nearly every situation, and in doing so, purposefully or not, they impoverish those citizens and disempower them from the possibility of advocating for change, as now they have to work so much there’s never any time to go to city council meetings or engage in active governance.
The average Gen Z, nationwide, pays over 50% of their income to rent. Its unsustainable, as evidenced by the insane increase in people experiencing homelessness over the last 5 years. My state had a nearly 40% increase last year alone, and a majority of our unhoused people work full time jobs, and a larger majority have lived here their whole life, contrary to the perceived narrative of people “moving here to be homeless”, which is absurd.
You’re getting argumentative with me like I’m the one who invented Capitalism.
Is 1000% a reasonable increase to you over 20 years?
Depends in relation to the prices of everything else over that same 20 years time frame.
All I’m saying is that prices go up over time, if for no other reason than just inflation. But supply and demand has a big part of raising prices even higher, more quickly. To act surprised that properties in high demand areas are more expensive now than before just seems unrealistic/uninformed to me.
Now what the solution to this is I don’t know, I’m not an economist. A conversation can be had as to if the government should enact laws of price control for the sale of homes and attach that to some floating marker like the rate of inflation, etc. Or to pass laws to make sure minimum wages offered by any company to their employees can allow someone to afford the purchase of a home with unregulated sales pricing. But you got to vote people in office who would want to pass those kind of laws to get that.
Most houses in desirable parts of the US are that bad. The cheap housing is in places that people don’t want to live, be it for location, job opportunities or culture/local laws.
And it’s not just the expensive towns. It’s any town. My childhood home an hour away from a major city has exponentially gone up in price, just as the ones in the city have done.
And it’s not just the expensive towns. It’s any town.
I don’t want to defend corporations that use real estate to gain profits, but at the same time, it’s not just any town, and I know this for a fact, as I started out by buying a very low price but very nice house that required a very long commute to my workplace, for low pricing.
They’re definitely needs to be an adjustment in salaries to match everything that is purchasable today, but to say that every housing in the country, no matter where it’s located, is not affordable is just not true.
$250,000 a year is middle class and has been for a long time - it’s about how much a doctor (who isn’t in a particularly high-paying specialty) makes. But DINKs with that household income could afford a million-dollar house.
They’re saying that someone that makes $250,000 today lives the lifestyle that would have been considered middle class 20 years ago, not that that salary is at all a median
They absolutely do not live remotely like middle class people from 2003. I graduated high school in 02 and my parents were mailmen. The difference in living standard is not even close.
I wasn’t saying that I thought that, I didn’t give my take at all, I was trying to be helpful in explaining what the other commenter meant. But since you’re calling me crazy…
To give my take on it, you’re right, there’s all sorts of ways that the lifestyles aren’t at all comparable, many things haven’t had the insane inflation that real estate has, so a person making 250k can obviously take a lot more vacations, go out to dinner more, buy more tech, etc than a middle class person from a few decades ago. But when it comes to buying homes, it gets a lot more comparable. Homes where I grew up have increased 4-5x in price over the last 25 years, so a family with a household income of 60k-ish (which is solidly middle class) buying a house that’s 3x their annual income would have been pretty typical in the early 2000’s. Now, if those same houses are being bought by households making 250k, it would be basically the same ratio of 3-4x their income.
So in home purchasing power (and that area only) low 6 figures is absolutely middle class, and anyone making under 6 figures has the home purchasing power of what used to be lower class
My personal definition of “upper class” excludes anyone who actually has to work. Wikipedia seems to agree, putting “CEOs and successful business owners” in the upper middle class. And the New York Times considers the 90th to 99th percentile of earners upper-middle-class.
I do see some places defining “upper class” as those earning at least twice the median household income (so about $150,000) but I don’t think that matches common usage. Is a software developer right out of college upper class? Or a nurse practitioner? I would say “clearly no, unless they happen to be from a very wealthy family”.
I really don’t think that’s a good metric given that the average house cost in San Francisco is 1.12 million dollars. Someone making $250,000 a year isn’t affording that house any more than someone making $54,000. They’re both priced out. That’s the point everyone else is making. That and the new idea what anyone working for a living is not upper class.
IDK why your comment reminded me, but back when I was in middle school (late 90s) we had an anti drug guest speaker. One of those ones where they were former addicts trying to scare you out of trying drugs. During the Q&A, someone asked him a question and that got him onto how plastic water bottles were super bad for you and you should never drink out of plastic because you’re ingesting tiny plastic particles. I remember we were laughing at him while administration was trying to shoo him off the stage.
Now we just kinda shrug when told we’re ingesting a credit card worth of plastic every week, lol.
lemmyshitpost
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.