Skip to content

Japan sets new internet speed world record — 4 million times faster than average US speeds

Technology
93 67 0
  • 89 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    69 Aufrufe
    S
    I suspect people (not billionaires) are realising that they can get by with less. And that the planet needs that too. And that working 40+ hours a week isn’t giving people what they really want either. Tbh, I don't think that's the case. If you look at any of the relevant metrics (CO², energy consumption, plastic waste, ...) they only know one direction globally and that's up. I think the actual issues are Russian invasion of Ukraine and associated sanctions on one of the main energy providers of Europe Trump's "trade wars" which make global supply lines unreliable and costs incalculable (global supply chains love nothing more than uncertainty) Uncertainty in regards to China/Taiwan Boomers retiring in western countries, which for the first time since pretty much ever means that the work force is shrinking instead of growing. Economical growth was mostly driven by population growth for the last half century with per-capita productivity staying very close to inflation. Disrupting changes in key industries like cars and energy. The west has been sleeping on may of these developments (e.g. electric cars, batteries, solar) and now China is curbstomping the rest of the world in regards to market share. High key interest rates (which are applied to reduce high inflation due to some of the reason above) reduce demand on financial investments into companies. The low interest rates of the 2010s and also before lead to more investments into companies. With interest going back up, investments dry up. All these changes mean that companies, countries and people in the west have much less free cash available. There’s also the value of money has never been lower either. That's been the case since every. Inflation has always been a thing and with that the value of money is monotonically decreasing. But that doesn't really matter for the whole argument, since the absolute value of money doesn't matter, only the relative value. To put it differently: If you earn €100 and the thing you want to buy costs €10, that is equivalent to if you earn €1000 and the thing you want to buy costing €100. The value of money dropping is only relevant for savings, and if people are saving too much then the economy slows down and jobs are cut, thus some inflation is positive or even required. What is an actual issue is that wages are not increasing at the same rate as the cost of things, but that's not a "value of the money" issue.
  • Signal – an ethical replacement for WhatsApp

    Technology technology
    235
    1
    1k Stimmen
    235 Beiträge
    1k Aufrufe
    V
    What I said is that smart people can be convinced to move to another platform. Most of my friends are not technically inclined, but it was easy to make them use it, at least to chat with me. What you did is change "smart people" with "people who already want to move", which is not the same. You then said it's not something you can choose (as you cannot choose to be rich). But I answered that you can actually choose your friends. Never did I say people who are not interested in niche technologies are not smart. My statement can be rephrased in an equivalent statement "people who cannot be convinced to change are not smart", and I stand to it.
  • 353 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    208 Aufrufe
    L
    If AI constantly refined its own output, sure, unless it hits a wall eventually or starts spewing bullshit because of some quirk of training. But I doubt it could learn to summarise better without external input, just like a compiler won't produce a more optimised version of itself without human development work.
  • 18 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    75 Aufrufe
    freebooter69@lemmy.caF
    The US courts gave corporations person-hood, AI just around the corner.
  • 105 Stimmen
    173 Beiträge
    759 Aufrufe
    smartmanapps@programming.devS
    the proper way is to group it as 1+(-2)+3 No it isn't. you can do it in any order You can do it in any order anyway left to right 1-2+3=-1+3=2 addition first 1+3-2=4-2=2 subtraction first -2+1+3=-1+3=2 right to left 3-2+1=1+1=2 What I meant with ““rule”” is the meme questions pray on people not understanding/remembering what the actual rules are And you showed that you were one of them. Every answer you got other than 4 was wrong, because you didn't understand the rules. spoiler alert: doing it in different orders never means add brackets to it. Addition first for 10-1+1 is 10+1-1, not 10-(1+1). See previous textbook example why “left to right” conventions exist They exist because people like you make mistakes when you try to do it in a different order. Either learn how the rules work or stop spreading disinformation. Well, you should stop spreading disinformation regardless.
  • 0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    38 Aufrufe
    H
    Then that's changed since the last time I toyed with the idea. Which, granted, was probably 20 years ago...
  • 116 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    40 Aufrufe
    S
    Common Noyb W
  • Data Bill: First They Came for Trans People

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    35 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet