I'd argue it's not about selling everything. Instead, avoid buying things by default and trying to keep up with the Joneses. You don't need to move to the wilderness, you just need to choose to escape consumerism.
For example:
- Do you really need a new car, when a lightly used one will do just fine and will be more economical?
- Do you really need to upgrade to a new phone every year when your current one is still working fine?
- Do you really need to buy premium clothes from the mall when the ones from Target are much cheaper?
Trying to be gentle here but this is pretty out of touch.
- I have bought a new car exactly once in my life, and likely never will again. This is the same as pretty much every other person I know personally. The last vehicle I bought had over 300k miles on it.
- Does anyone buy a new phone every year? I've never met them.
- Do you really need the fancy clothes from Target when the ones from Walmart or Goodwill are much cheaper?
> Does anyone buy a new phone every year? I've never met them.
Look around where your posting and remember that Apple has an upgrade program as well as most US cell carriers that will push you to upgrade your phone. Let a lone the thousands of Apple product release threads where people brag about buying the latest and greatest device.
> Do you really need the fancy clothes from Target when the ones from Walmart or Goodwill are much cheaper?
Now I’m confused, are Target brands considered fancy?
I just grabbed random things I've seen from behavior in other people. If you don't fall victim to those consumerist traps, then that's legitimately great.
Yes, I absolutely know folks who buy new phones every year, and who lease new cars and upgrade every 3 years. Most of whom really can't really afford to do these things but do it anyway and end up in increasing debt.
And sure, buy clothes from Walmart if you have a Walmart location near you. I just picked the nearest big-box store to me, for some reason Walmart doesn't have much of a presence out where I am.
(The takeaway I got from the game is "don't try to buy the hat, it's a trap". I'm curious what your takeaway was?)
I think I just took issue with what seemed like trite advice about what it takes to win at life or whatever. Your other comment on the thread cleared it up well enough:
> I'm absolutely not saying this alone is sufficient - particularly if you're unemployed or your job truly doesn't pay a living wage.
and I agree with that completely. I can definitely get behind not buying the hat (or buying a cheaper hat) but at some point it's not a hat, it's a vehicle that you need to get to work or a home repair or medical bill or something and your options become a) buy the cheap thing (and buy it again in six months when it breaks and is now more expensive) or b) walk away and suffer the consequences. I've done both, and neither really feels like winning.
- Do you really need to keep your children in school or contribute to their higher education, when you can just let them roam free on the streets or better yet, work down at the factory and earn their keep?
- Do you really need children at all, when an AI digital pet might satisfy that need much more economically?
- Do you really need expensive dental crown implants or dentures, when you can whittle yourself some chompers out of beechwood and call it a shuccshesh?
- Do you really need to own a home in a neighbourhood that is safe and close enough to your place of employment, when you can rent in a rough area of town and spend hours commuting on public transport?
> 77 percent of low-income households can cover an unexpected $400 expense, though many must cover it with disposable income or short-term credit... 43 percent of low-income households unable to weather small expense shocks might be able to pay them with access to additional credit.
I'm not sure if credit is the ideal solution, nor if additional credit would be beneficial.
Generally, lots of debt, but they still do it. I know people who go into debt for “fun” purchases, then complain that their credit card bills are so high they can’t afford anything
I'm absolutely not saying this alone is sufficient - particularly if you're unemployed or your job truly doesn't pay a living wage. There are absolutely people who don't make enough to survive - and that's a bigger problem of course.
It's always been a good idea to have a UPS in front of any digital electronics anyway.
Brown-outs are arguably more dangerous to your electronics, and those are more common now with more frequent heat waves during the summer, stressing the electric grid and triggering public safety shutoffs on the US west coast.
I also think the concerns in the article are overblown. I grew up in the mountains where the electric grid was notoriously poor quality, especially when buildings would fail over to (often poor-quality) generators. It would make computer monitors misbehave, but rarely did it actually damage anything.
Again, good luck affording a UPS when price hikes really kick off. If there is no workstation market, even for small businesses, what happens to the UPS market?
This is basically what the glass repair kits sold at auto parts stores are. (They also include a suction cup with syringe, to vacuum any air bubbles out.)
If you are preparing for your own defense and don't have an attorney (you're acting pro se), your own LLM use would likely be protected under work product doctrine. The court would extend you some of the same protections an attorney would have, for the limited purposes of preparing your case.
This is a very narrow exemption, however.
(You would also want to make sure you're using a paid AI plan with contractually guaranteed privacy protections, otherwise it could be construed as third-party communications, which implicitly waives privilege.)
#1 is a little complicated. Communications with an AI are possibly sometimes protected by work-product doctrine... but only if you're representing yourself as a pro se litigant, and strictly limited to mental impressions and opinion work product of counsel (in this case, extended to the pro se litigant). See: Warner v. Gilbarco, Inc.
Once you've lost more than ~2 processors, you're probably into the realm of common mode failures and voting won't save you. At that point, it's entirely possible you're just working with random data coming out of all your processors.
> I wonder what happens if you disable the e-SIM (in the US) and then a safety recall appears via software update - do dealers have any way to update control modules besides OTA?
I would assume so. Even on older cars, service techs can typically manually push firmware updates over the OBD-II / J2534 port. Rivian's OBD-II port actually hides an Ethernet signal inside of it - so the interface is certainly there.
> Rivian's OBD-II port actually hides an Ethernet signal inside of it - so the interface is certainly there.
Nice. This is really normal now, for what it's worth - all of the European makes have moved this direction as well (DoIP over ENET). There's shockingly little documentation about Rivian online, though, probably because emissions regulation doesn't mandate it.
I don't see anything suspicious, but I browse with scripts and ads blocked, so it's possible that you encountered something that never reached me. Thanks for the warning. Unfortunately, it's too late to edit my comment.
Yep! Depending on the vintage, BMWs have "real" DoIP or a BMW-ized version (sort of like how KWP2000 was the predecessor to UDS). For emissions modules, they still also have to support updates over UDS as well as ENET, though, for the above mentioned J2534 reasons (Ethernet wasn't added to J2534 until 2022).
Actually almost any fuel injected vehicle can accept flash updates through the port to at least the ECU and PCM, frequently the BCU is also write enabled.
If there is a BCM. My previous 1995 GMC C1500 had a PCM and the automatic transmission was controlled by mechanical linkage to a hydraulic computer in the transmission along with shift solenoids from the PCM. It also had "throttle-body injection" with two injectors replacing the carburetor. The OBD 1 system would switch to "open loop control" with preprogrammed injection in the event of a malfunction which would make the thing challenging to drive until you fixed the problem. So very simple compared to the multitude of computers and control systems in use today.
A nice feature on that system was that you could put a paperclip between two pins on the diagnostic port and it would blink out the trouble codes on the SES light.
You can adjust the ECU for these 80s and 90s cars and “flash” them like anything else. There’s just a lot less settings! Not sure about the 70s but I’m sure some resto-mods also allow for this.
Even in the US, I don't know many friends with enough living space to have an entire spare guest room.
When friends visit, they sleep on the living room couch or an air mattress. Is this not typical?
Flippant answer: in the U.S., in your twenties, you have no spare space, and visiting friends sleep on your couch. In your forties, you have a guest bedroom, and visiting friends stay at a hotel.
Possibly more accurate answer: it depends on what kind of housing people live in, if they have kids, and if they work at home. Most residential houses were built for couples with children, so if someone owns a house and is single and/or childless, they likely have spare bedrooms that serve as a home offices, hobby spaces, or guest bedrooms. People living in apartments usually don't pay for more space than required for their daily needs.
Somebody else was likely sleeping in the living room already. The reality of living conditions in the USSR was harsh.
You were typically allocated spacious 9 square meters (96 sq. ft.) of living space per person, with an additional 18 square meters for the head of the family. So a 4-person family would get about 45 square meters (485 sq. ft.)
And these were _typical_ numbers, not a guarantee. Plenty of families had less space.
In most of the Eastern block the accommodation given to a family was sized for that family. Few had the luxury of a completely unused room.
The kitchen was routinely used as a room for two reasons, one that it was obviously a room, the second because it was easy to heat with the stove being right there. A lot of families were using the kitchen as permanent living space, usually relegating the grandparents to that worst room so the young ones could get a decent start in life.
It doesn't seem that crazy that there would be very little space. Visiting parents and/or grandparents probably got the bedroom, some friends the living room.
It's less common than it used to be, but in India it's still kind of normal for newlyweds to live in the groom's parents' kitchen for a while until they get their own place
> Often they don't pay high taxes nor do they employ large numbers of people... They are building and selling a non tangible good i.e where do you tax it?
You could easily charge a property tax (could even have a higher rate for data centers, specifically), or an excise tax on number of servers, or a tax on excess energy/water consumption. There's lots of options here, if that's what you're worried about.
> Their is also noise pollution concerns which can destroy communities near by and water usage concerns. These plants drain aquaifers.
Factories also do both of these things. They're noisy, often have emissions much worse than anything coming from a datacenter, and most factories use large quantities of water as well.
We need to go full Oracle and charge an excise tax per logical CPU core. For GPUs we can count SIMT lanes.
More seriously they should be taxed per watt, likely in an asymptotic manner because most of the externalities don't scale linearly. Any additional infrastructure requirements should be directly rolled into their electric and water bills, which is to say that they should receive a very unfavorable rate.
I mean yeah it think their are some ideas around how to tax things better and rolling up the real infrastructure and resource costs. All these things can be done but the conversation above has that as the last thought which is what many towns that get destroyed by data-centers do. They job to conclusions about these things being universially good or making jobs but dont' engage with the reality of the math that goes into that decisions. Whether towns can do that hard to say but I believe the state government has an obligation to aid its local governments and stake holders i.e people to not get ripped off and forced in to terrible contracts that hurt the states long term
Yeah but the data centers write contracts that making changing the laws around property contractually impossible if you don't argree to their hostile terms they just move to the next town willing to accept. Towns are not a necessiarly smart enough to do all contractual footwork especially when companies heavily lobby the towns population with empty promises. But even if they do the best thing that happens is the company moves to a more willing town. Most data centers are build in poor places because those towns are looking for something to change their circumstances.
Also I am not saying factories are all good they pump stuff like TEFLON in rivers but at least the people locally get a good job out of it. And they make those trades even when the negative impacts exceed the positive gains like with data centers. Its from position of depressed town where the people want to see the golden days return.
Also this is a deal with negatives and positives you haven't listed a positive for these data centers in your reply I think is indicitive that you haven't explored the effect of data centers in places like Louisiana which is very permisive.
I think just saying maybe towns should do better laws doesn't recognize the power differential between a town and likely a poor town and a Trillion dollar corportations. Idea's like an excise tax like that is way more complex than you are thinking does a server excise tax effect just these data centers or anyone doing data center processing i.e local hospitals. The Law is very complex when it comes to inventing new taxes but yeah some of those things should be investigated it might be a good case to have a pause to study those proposals and implement them so that towns don't just get screwed over. And I am not saying there isn't a dynamic in which data centers can help local communities its just that has not been the case for more data centers than the public is potentially willing to tolerate. Make the economics better for people and I am sure governments would not stand in the way its just at this point their is little effort to do so.
For example:
- Do you really need a new car, when a lightly used one will do just fine and will be more economical?
- Do you really need to upgrade to a new phone every year when your current one is still working fine?
- Do you really need to buy premium clothes from the mall when the ones from Target are much cheaper?
reply