AI does have little to do with it, but we can’t do housing the way people want housing. The land does not exist in sufficient quantity, in the desired areas, without other strings attached (such as private ownership). And it would still take a decade to build it all because there aren’t enough tradespeople in the places where you want the housing built.
This is complete and utter bullshit. We have enough of everything to start solving housing this second. Workers aren’t a problem, locations aren’t a problem. We lack the political will to do it, read: we don’t want to do it. Having “AI” tell you why you don’t want to do it is just wasteful
I won’t argue that AI won’t solve the housing problem. And I agree that we can build a bunch of housing. But it won’t be where people want to live, or it won’t be affordable. I’ve got people in my town screaming for affordable housing. Even with subsidies its hard to get things going when the local municipality is practically bending over backwards. Why? Because it has to be on a bus line. It has to be within walking distance of X services. And all the land that fits those criteria is millions of dollars an acre. Even if you could find them, the contractors can’t find enough qualified, reliable workers at premium rates to service their million dollar home builds. I’m in the industry and I don’t care how much “will power” you have; short of taking land through eminent domain and using it for free, you won’t have anyplace that meets any kind of criteria for livability. Hell, I could go buy 1000 acres just an hour down the road for $1M and put up 10,000 houses that only cost $50k each to build. Thing is, nobody is going to buy them. There is literally no demand, even for cheap housing, that takes an hour drive to get anywhere useful - and if you get closer in, you won’t find land that’s affordable. Heck, by the time I extended infrastructure to them or built it out, it would be 3-4 years before the first resident could move in, and that’s with zero delay on any governmental paperwork.
There’s nothing AI could do to help with that. It’s not a technology issue, it’s purely a political will issue. We could house every single homeless person in this country with no problem whatsoever. Right now. Today. But we choose not to.
Maybe AI could solve it – at least, that’s what Scott Alexander has proposed back in 2014. His idea was that of an AGI that would optimize human life (or the universe itself, I guess) for human values instead of profit or other things that drive the whole Moloch problem he thoroughly describes. I imagine housing would also be solved along the way lol
“Now, labeled content is allowed that features “body writing on female-presenting breasts and/or buttocks regardless of gender” and “erotic dances that involve disrobing or disrobing gestures, such as strip teases.”
A shame the writers of the law didn't have good enough knowledge of the underlying technology to mandate not just the USB C connector, but specific USB C standards. The fact that USB C cables are very much "you can't even tell what it does without plugging it in" is a bit of a nightmare.
But on the other hand, there's always changes for further revisions in the future.
And fortunately they made the law future proof. It doesn’t say that “hey, you should use USB-C” but it says “hey, you should use the connector mentioned in Appendix H which is defined by committee R”. That way they don’t need to start over the whole bureaucratic process the pass the law, just ask a committee to reevaluate the tech and they change the appendix. It can be USB-D from tomorrow.
Quick aside, there won’t be a USB D (unless the USB people change their mind yet again), it will be something different from USB. The idea was to have USB A be what you plug on your source and B on your destination and was designed as a way to avoid power surges in the original 1.0 spec because the A side was physically different from the B side you weren’t ever going to plug in something that sends power to something that receives power (basically it prevented users from breaking their devices on accident). USB C changed that with a chip on each cable that handles negotiation before agreeing on a power spec
Honestly I never had a problem with MicroUSB and haven’t really seen a benefit to USB-C for basic charging of devices. I guess some might charge faster, but USB-C is so screwed up that you need a magic mix of cable, charger and device to get more than baseline anyway, it works the same as MicroUSB for me.
I’ve had and seen many a device get ruined when the fragile connector breaks off. Combined with the slower charging, lower speed transfer, one way design that isn’t as obvious, etc.
And yes, I’d rather have lightning over usb-c as at least the lightning cables have consistent standards.
This points out to me that I don’t think I understand how Lemmy works. Why aren’t comments on this exact post on a different server coming through to this comment section?
couldn’t read the whole article, but the first couple paragraphs seem to contradict the headline. ‘~15% of reddit users have encountered corporate astroturfing’ is not the same as ‘15% of content on reddit is corporate astroturfing’.
Well, the article (at least in the free part… I’m not making an account just to fact check this site) mentions two studies right off the bat and claims that they shed light on the impact of corporate trolls on Reddit.
“Two significant studies, the Pew Research Center study conducted in 2018 and the Computers in Human Behavior study published in 2020, have shed light on the prevalence and impact of corporate trolls on Reddit.”
If you look up these studies, the Pew Research Center has a survey they conduct and although the article claims they interviewed 2500 americans who use reddit the actual study had only 2,002 adults. It was also a study about what sites they used. It had nothing to do with Reddit. In fact, if you switch over to the Detailed Table, Reddit wasn’t even mentioned as a response. pewresearch.org/…/social-media-use-2018-methodolo…
I could not find a “Computers in Human Behavior study published in 2020” that matched the article’s description. I did find a study published by them in 2020 about selfies and body image and especially snapchat. Once again, no reddit. But I can’t say I found the article mentioned.
Then again, I can’t say the articles mentioned exist at all. ChatGPT almost certainly hallucinated this.
technology
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.