Funny Events of the "Woke" world
- Thread starter CriticalGaming
- Start date
Affordable Connectivity Program
Due to a lack of additional funding from Congress, the Affordable Connectivity Program has ended for now. Effective June 1, 2024, households will no longer receive an ACP discount.
No amount of independent internet research gets you the certificate on the wall that employers actually care about.Affordable Connectivity Program
Due to a lack of additional funding from Congress, the Affordable Connectivity Program has ended for now. Effective June 1, 2024, households will no longer receive an ACP discount.www.fcc.gov
Also, while the $30 is nice it's not even half of what internet costs
This depends on whether we can devise enough alternative jobs for them to do which are sufficiently well paid. I don't think all these millions can get by as social media influencers or Twitch streamers.
Pakistan police arrest 129 over attacks on churches and homes of Christians
Soldiers have been dispatched to restore calm in eastern Pakistan following riots that were sparked by the alleged desecration of Islam's holy book.
www.sbs.com.au
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_(harassment_campaign)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...chool-sues-insurance-false-racism-claims.html
https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/08/14/the-deadly-consequences-of-cancel-culture/
Cancel culture tends to do the "erradicating," as you put it.
Any skill you can learn at your computer in a couple of months is likely, at this point, either actively in the process of being automated or not very far beyond the capabilities of a machine. The skills you can possess that are safe from being automated into obsolescence are rapidly diminishing, and as more and more people are displaced by automation, the competition for those jobs that do remain increases. Even if you can't be replaced by a machine, you will likely find yourself being managed by one.
Automation might fundamentally seem like a good thing, and potentially it is. The amount that modern humans work is frankly stupid and inefficient, it exists because our society treats work as a measure of personal value, and because for most people labor is the only meaningful bargaining chip they possess. But this means that as machines replace the need for human labour, the vast majority of humans will have no value at all. The existing capital monopoly will be replaced by an even more extreme machine monopoly, where the only way to have any power in the world is through ownership of the machines that perform the automated labor.
At that point, things start to get very nightmarish and dystopian, especially since the machines at that point may well have become agentive, meaning any effort to change the existing order will be resisted not only by the human strategies of the machine owning elite, but by inhuman and unpredictable strategies devised by machines themselves.
Last edited:
And those cheerleading for full automation seem to very easily forget one thing:
Robots don't buy cheeseburgers.
I'm referencing the CEO of Carl's Jr., who complained about rising minimum wages and stated that he'd like to see automation spread. But here's the thing: If you push all the humans out of jobs, how are they supposed to pay for the things you're making? The robots you'd employ don't need food, or clothing, or recreation- that's their whole value, after all.
Widespread automation has to correspond with the ability to attain a reasonable standard of living without working. Owners so far seem happy to work on one without the other, but it isn't really tenable.
Widespread Automation without a corresponding decrease in the necessity of work to the individual can only lead to one of two places: an exacerbated poverty crisis, or the proliferation of working for the pure sake of working. The creation of jobs solely to be jobs, that do not confer value, and exist to justify wage.
At present, there just doesn't seem to be much thought put into it.
One can make the argument that - so far - society has always managed to create enough new jobs every time a technological advancement has made a load of old ones obsolete. So it would be a reasonable assumption that would occur again.
A second possibility, that CEO just hasn't really thought that far. If there's one thing we know from the occasional antics of CEOs, it's that outside running their business, they can be extraordinarily ignorant and/or believe some weird and crazy shit.
A third possibility, "not my problem". His customers will have to be given money, just conveniently by someone else.
I do notice that a lot of businesses that cater to poorer people are beginning to make noises up about low pay issues (even if they're not willing to raise their own staff wages - see [3] "not my problem"). Obviously, this isn't really a wellbeing concern so much as that they're bothered that their customers can't buy so much of their stuff, but the point remains.
Because Tech companies, and even the big three investment firms; State Street, Black Rock, and Vanguard are small compared to governments who refused to do anything. The White House is led by a non-forward-thinking leader in Biden just like Trump was, he is more built for WW2 or WW3 than peace because he doesn't think in terms of dynamic structural change.
Everyone online hates Black Rock, Conservatives hate them for ESG, and progressives hate them for being a large source of unaccountable power.
However given the fact that the Democrats will almost certainly win the 2024 elections, and the 2028 elections(Don't quote me on this) due to climate change, we effectively live in a one-party state. Which breeds laziness, and bad policy.
Frankly, it's not a very immediate threat. Widespread automation will take decades at least, and the US election cycle discourages leaders from investing to prevent problems that far in advance.
A single party winning three elections in a row doesn't make a one-party state. Its quite common in democratic societies.
You're right to say that a lack of meaningful opposition can breed complacency and smother meaningful policy changes. On the other hand, you know what has an even worse effect on policy? The Republicans ever getting any power.
It's funny let's say hypothetically an asteroid falls down on Earth loaded with expensive resources that dwarf even the debt by a factor of 10. To lessen other variables let's say it fell on a state and no one died, and to make this even more unrealistic, and simple let's say everyone agreed it belongs to the federal government. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Biden straight-up just gave it to the highest US bidder for pennies on the dollar with Black Rock and Co. coming in and lobbying them when in reality the best thing to do would be to charge for it at semi market rates, pay off the debt, make SS and the Medicare plus Medicaid programs solvent, do lots of future goods spending aka infrastructure spending with high-speed rail, walkable cities for those that want it, housing, and etc.
Don't for a second think this isn't plausible.