The concept of resource depletion has never be "proven" wrong, because it is true. Its origin is in basic physics - exponential growth in a constrained environment is unsustainable, and physics laws as of yet have not been successfully modified by politicians or economists, and not for lack of trying. There are fools, though, whose perception has been modified to ignore them.
The bunch of strawmen that appear to address the issue do so only because they don't recognize the true resource limits and the true process that eats into them.
As "nations become prosperous", they consume exponentially more. "Access to technology" is not a panacea, when the limits of the resources are reached. And Earth is there already: the biosphere is collapsing, an extinction event is in progress, the global climate is heading towards catastrophic changes.
There is little on the "technological" horizon that will help with any of these, and there is nothing that will help at the scale that is necessary.
Actually, we knew this will happen over a hundred years ago already.
A certain Mr. Malthus explained how the world will drown in its own manure. He is still "ridiculed" by the unsophisticated liberal arts bunch who call themselves "economists" and don't understand basic physics, although we see more and more evidence that our "growth" is unsustainable.
The world is drowning in the excess heat the human shit is trapping, drowning in the garbage people are producing and the biosphere is being literally converted to shit at an increasing pace.
And due to the well-known market failure of underinvestment in science and technology, coupled to the slow erosion of democracy by the rich elites, it is increasingly unlikely we'll get a "technological solution".
is truly beyond me. The so-called "copyright" isn't a right, the so-called "intellectual property" is not property.
These used to be contracts with a pretty narrow meaning - a few years of monopoly on the distribution of your work and all the money you can get for it, but IN EXCHANGE for making it available afterwards.
Today, the second part of the deal is gone, so there is absolutely no reason to stick to the first one, and especially to accept the sodomizer of the reader that the DRM is.
Every conservative British outfit and talking head, from Theresa May, to BJ, to Nigel Farage has repeatedly told me that with the savings we realize from the Brexit, we can pay for anything.
And with fredumz to negotiate our own trade terms, we can profit from everywhere.
We will negotiate bigly with the AI and get a great deal.
"Your privacy is not compromised" is, of course, bullshit, people have been working on matching a voice print to the person since the voice was first transformed to an electric signal.
Their primary concern is increasing profits, which happens by increasing the revenue (getting as close to a monopolist as possible) and lowering the costs (a.k.a. optimizing the workforce and lowering the tax burden).
In established oligarchies, where "the law" is drafted between lobbyists and legislators over expensive lunches paid by the former, Apple is in compliance because they write the laws.
In places like China, where the ruling elite is more aligned to an ideology, they listen and obey.
The job of Apple isn't to ask for more "democracy" in China. That's the job of the US government.
Slashdot Mirror
the concept has already proven to be wrong.
The concept of resource depletion has never be "proven" wrong, because it is true. Its origin is in basic physics - exponential growth in a constrained environment is unsustainable, and physics laws as of yet have not been successfully modified by politicians or economists, and not for lack of trying. There are fools, though, whose perception has been modified to ignore them.
The bunch of strawmen that appear to address the issue do so only because they don't recognize the true resource limits and the true process that eats into them.
As "nations become prosperous", they consume exponentially more. "Access to technology" is not a panacea, when the limits of the resources are reached. And Earth is there already: the biosphere is collapsing, an extinction event is in progress, the global climate is heading towards catastrophic changes.
There is little on the "technological" horizon that will help with any of these, and there is nothing that will help at the scale that is necessary.
Actually, we knew this will happen over a hundred years ago already.
A certain Mr. Malthus explained how the world will drown in its own manure. He is still "ridiculed" by the unsophisticated liberal arts bunch who call themselves "economists" and don't understand basic physics, although we see more and more evidence that our "growth" is unsustainable.
The world is drowning in the excess heat the human shit is trapping, drowning in the garbage people are producing and the biosphere is being literally converted to shit at an increasing pace.
And due to the well-known market failure of underinvestment in science and technology, coupled to the slow erosion of democracy by the rich elites, it is increasingly unlikely we'll get a "technological solution".
It is all thoughts and prayers from now on.
As long as the copyright lasts, I'm paying for it by allowing a monopoly to distort the market outcome.
is truly beyond me. The so-called "copyright" isn't a right, the so-called "intellectual property" is not property.
These used to be contracts with a pretty narrow meaning - a few years of monopoly on the distribution of your work and all the money you can get for it, but IN EXCHANGE for making it available afterwards.
Today, the second part of the deal is gone, so there is absolutely no reason to stick to the first one, and especially to accept the sodomizer of the reader that the DRM is.
No amazon, no kindle, sorry.
Yes, we need it very hard and hairy. The only problem is that it will not be only for the fans, everyone will get shafted.
It disables the right click... Oh, wait.
Every conservative British outfit and talking head, from Theresa May, to BJ, to Nigel Farage has repeatedly told me that with the savings we realize from the Brexit, we can pay for anything.
And with fredumz to negotiate our own trade terms, we can profit from everywhere.
We will negotiate bigly with the AI and get a great deal.
"Your privacy is not compromised" is, of course, bullshit, people have been working on matching a voice print to the person since the voice was first transformed to an electric signal.
Total diameter has much to do with the angular resolution, that is, how small a thing you can see.
The area has to do with how much light you gather.
The quality of the image has to do with the quality of the optics - physical and adaptive.
A modern telescope is a complex machine and employs a bunch of tricks to get those pretty pictures on APOD.
Come on, it will be put in space by SpaceX. They'll drive it up the HypeLoop on a Tesla Model 4's with the Space Launcher mode.
Their primary concern is increasing profits, which happens by increasing the revenue (getting as close to a monopolist as possible) and lowering the costs (a.k.a. optimizing the workforce and lowering the tax burden).
In established oligarchies, where "the law" is drafted between lobbyists and legislators over expensive lunches paid by the former, Apple is in compliance because they write the laws.
In places like China, where the ruling elite is more aligned to an ideology, they listen and obey.
The job of Apple isn't to ask for more "democracy" in China. That's the job of the US government.