Scenario one: We get an FDR style leader to fix this stuff after a massive economic collapse and public backlash. (As Biden posited in his farewell address.) This will either lead to court packing or (like last time) the lapdogs on the court will accept their new leashes.
Scenario two: The federal government suffers a partial or complete collapse, and the US ends up being city-states or like the former USSR. (I think this is more likely, and also what Putin wants, assuming he can’t keep Trump under control.)
It’s also possible we’ll continue to have fair elections and the courts will stop abusing their power. This seems the least likely to me.
Under all other scenarios, we’re completely screwed and the current courts will already go along with it.
In the 2024 report file sharing was #4 in downstream volume. 9% of total compared to 39% for video. Youtube was 16%, Netflix 12%. Piracy is still way less common compared to streaming, tho I do enjoy the unbeatable quality of a 50GB bluray remux
I used pirate streaming websites as a kid, but I thought fewer people use them today because the video quality sucks. Any stats on the percent of people using them over time?
According to research conducted by NERA Economic Consulting and the US Chamber of Commerce’s Global Innovation and Policy Center, over four-fifths of all online piracy-related activities are linked to illegal streaming websites. This trend is especially prominent in the TV and movie industry.
He gave many examples of people treating her as a her as a hero. Eg:
> United States Rep. Kwesi Mfume (D-Md) filed legislation to posthumously award the Congressional Gold Medal to Henrietta Lacks for her distinguished contributions to science. The award is one of the most prestigious civilian honors given by the United States government
They gave the medal to everyone who died in 9/11, and while I think there was probably several acts of heroism involved on the day, the aim there seems to be recognizing victims more than heros.
But the actual criteria for the medal is nothing to do with heroism:
> made a major and long-standing impact on American history and culture.
Which I think is a bar she (and 9/11 victims) clears easily.
> people are suddenly posting all sorts of spicy things
I don't think this is particularly spicy. What posts are you thinking of? pg has criticized woke for at least a decade so that's not a new thing either.
Why so confident? I would never try to extort people who cured a bunch of diseases using cancer tissue from me or my parents. I also wouldn't want society to treat me as a hero for something I didn't do:
> Some people are going to tell me I’m underplaying the race angle, and that black women need heroes. I think this is the worst part. There are thousands of black female doctors, black female scientists, etc. Whenever we recognize white people who have contributed to medicine, it’s Brilliant Dr. So-And-So Who Cured A Deadly Disease. What message does it send black women if the most prominent medical hero that society gives them is someone with zero medical ability or medicine-related-virtues, whose only contribution was passively letting someone else take a clump of their cells without her knowledge? Did you know a black woman, Mattiedna Johnson, helped cure scarlet fever? No you did not, because whenever people want to talk about black women in medicine they talk about Henrietta Lacks - who was not, technically, in medicine.
Funny how quickly you reach for hyperbole - if you own a plot of land and people discover some ore or treasure there, are you an "extortioner" for asking a share of its value? So when someone extract value from a piece of your body, it shouldn't apply? (And I am talking about moral, not legal ideals)
I give blood too, and I had some genetic testing done on my cells. I signed a paper to allow further use of both for research. There's a reason we implemented such obligations.
But the mere fact you went hyperbolic - nothing to do with disgust at a *black* *woman* daring to ask for money, huh? There's a lot of words you could have used - "ask for", "request", "demand" but you went straight for "extort" - when there is no constraint, nothing has been done, and the moral failure is clearly on the side of the people who took and used the cells and clearly gained money and social status with them.
Oh I talked to some guys who started a company that does that. This was at an AI meetup in SF last year. They were mainly focused on making $/token cheaper by directing easy/dumb queries to smaller dumber models, but it also increases output quality because some models are just better at certain things. I'm sure all the big companies already have implementations of this by now even if they don't use it everywhere
>Let’s say you wanted to count how many of your online friends were dogs, while respecting the maxim that, on the Internet, nobody should know you’re a dog. To do this, you could ask each friend to answer the question “Are you a dog?” in the following way. Each friend should flip a coin in secret, and answer the question truthfully if the coin came up heads; but, if the coin came up tails, that friend should always say “Yes” regardless. Then you could get a good estimate of the true count from the greater-than-half fraction of your friends that answered “Yes”. However, you still wouldn’t know which of your friends was a dog: each answer “Yes” would most likely be due to that friend’s coin flip coming up tails.
reply