-
Love this. I have a few opinions and thoughts I might get the laptop out to hammer in later while I am losing money on horses. I find myself disillusioned.
Most of my shit will probably be pulled apart in seconds but I'm not worried. Also as just mentioned, be better over a few beers
-
i really should be working, but the War thread prompted me
Is this sustainable? I don't know how it could be, except for the fact that the average joe seems to have less control over shit than ever.
Our current iteration of Shareholder Returns capitalism is creating an ever increasing divide in society i am sure of it. I look at a company like Amazon, and it looks, from the outside, to be everything that is wrong with the current set up. Bezos has more money than fucking god. Yes, i know it's all on paper, but that level of wealth is actually obscene. And Amazon is by all accounts a shitty company. That wealth of Bezos is built on squashing smaller companies, paying their staff fuck all, passing the benefits of efficiencies to the owners, and generally acting in a shitty way. All power to him, the bloke is obviously a fucking genius, and pretty much nothing he is doing is illegal. Does his company pay their fair share of tax? don't be fucking stupid.
Amazon is one example. But there are countless, countless others where the over-riding drive of providing benefit to shareholders is actually detrimental to society as a whole. And in the main it is making the few very rich at the expense of the vast majority. Again, nothing new, but i feel like it is getting worse. And someone always says "oh but your Super fund gets bigger" but i bet the regulations say my Super fund isn't allowed to invest in Amazon.
Industries like banking and insurance are essentials in modern society, but are getting more and more difficult to access because they should involve risk, and risk is bad for shareholder returns (and bonuses, lets not overlook that fact). Health insurance in Aus gets fucking outrageous every single year because they need to maintain that profit. It might hit a tipping point soon enough because the profitable young people are getting out, leaving the unprofitable old people on the books.
My completely uniformed opinion is that the efficiencies we are creating through technology are benefiting a small number of people while leaving an enormous amount behind. Wage growth was stagnant before 2020 proper fucked everything (except for those really rich fluffybunnies who made a fuck ton more), there are less and less opportunities for young people to earn a living. Costs continue to rise (not CPI, fuck that as a measure) for shit people actually spend on, houses, food, insurance, fuel but incomes do not.
And who is there to change anything? Certainly not our elected representatives, who not only are powerless to enact real change, but can't see beyond the next opinion poll, let alone election cycle. People have no power to change anything, but worse than that, can't even ask the right questions. Because we are too easily distracted by the wrong shit. My conspiracy theory is that the culture war is fueled by the "global elite" to keep the plebs fighting among themselves so the status quo is maintained in perpetuity
gah, this is a rambling rant of baseless crap. I am severely disillusioned with Western society at the moment, and my strongly capitalism first ideals are being eroded as i see more and more that the system is failing more and more people.
Feel free to hack this to bits and make me feel better
-
I don't discount some of the major threats at the moment, but Western Civilisation has also proven surprisingly resilient in recent centuries. In the 20th Century alone:
-
In early 1914 we'd have been morsing the TSF exchange about the dasterdly Kaiser and his Teutonic threat to all we hold dear
-
In 1928 we'd have been writing early Disgusted of Tumbridge Wells style letters to the TSF Chronicle about the early signs of financial meltdown, while lamenting growing unequal wealth distribution, and wondering how the stock market could still keep soaring.
-
In 1938 arguments would have turned to drunken brawling in The Silver and Fern over whether Chamberlain has achieved peace in our time, or instead sold out 'the survival of Christian civilization ... the long continuity of our institutions, and [the] Empire'
-
In 1946 fireside chats with Ferners would have agonised over the future of the atomic bomb, the evil intentions of Stalin, and the iron curtain. While also hailing the impact of "the bikini as the "atom bomb of fashion"" for the Hawt PG13 wall near the Gents in The Silver and Fern.
-
In 1975 the end of the Vietnam war would have generated fresh concerns about the spread of communism, Domino Theory, and the fall of Western Civilisation over ferocious games of Pong near the pool table in The Silver and Fern.
I suppose on the law of averages something will eventually bring the Western World completely down. But then, it has been surprisingly durable too. In some of those cases above things did go catastrophically wrong... but each time we came out the other side, eventually, in reasonable shape.
-
-
@donsteppa delete the last line, the whole things is worth reading
-
@kiwiwomble said in Is this thing sustainable?:
@donsteppa delete the last line, the whole things is worth reading
Done It was a "tl;dr" line for anyone wondering...
-
@donsteppa no way we are on the way out. And there is still a lot of cool shit happening that are causes for optimism.
But there are parts of our future i struggle to wrap my head around.
-
@mariner4life said in Is this thing sustainable?:
@donsteppa no way we are on the way out. And there is still a lot of cool shit happening that are causes for optimism.
But there are parts of our future i struggle to wrap my head around.
so
future? yes
what does it looking? next to no idea
-
It'll never be the end of the world but it's a shame (and a backwards step) if the kids grow up in a regulated, sanitized, less carefree existence, with adult concepts constantly foistered upon them.
But then again does a battery hen know of the life a free range hen lives?🙂
-
I'm an optimist. Reckon we will be fine until that asteroid hits or that zombie virus arrives
Enjoyed this podcast if anyone is interested
-
saw a funny comment that, paraphrased, was essentially
The space race used to be between nations, now it's between rich fluffybunnies.
Maybe the system is a bit fucking broken.
-
@mariner4life said in Is this thing sustainable?:
saw a funny comment that, paraphrased, was essentially
The space race used to be between nations, now it's between rich fluffybunnies.
Maybe the system is a bit fucking broken.
It might have been fixed.
-
@snowy said in Is this thing sustainable?:
@mariner4life said in Is this thing sustainable?:
saw a funny comment that, paraphrased, was essentially
The space race used to be between nations, now it's between rich fluffybunnies.
Maybe the system is a bit fucking broken.
It might have been fixed.
... and they are spending way, way less and achieving a shedload more.
SpaceX was founded on $100M. Everything raised after their initial success was based on track record and the ability to launch. And they are literally revolutionising space. And failing spectacularly along the way.
Remember, it's only been 5 years since a rocket was landed and re-used. Now it's routine, and those bad boys are properly re-usable with engines flying more than 10x... and multiple times a year. This shit is a revolution, and it's awesome
-
@kiwiwomble said in Is this thing sustainable?:
@nzzp is that all? $100m
that was what Elon put in originally to get the engines developed and flying. There may have been a match from funders, but it was in that order.
Of course, now they are flying they are getting massive rounds of funding - but the initial proof to get contracts was tiny compared to other budgets.
-
@nzzp said in Is this thing sustainable?:
... and they are spending way, way less and achieving a shedload more.
Yep.
No taxpayer dollars and the usual wastage. Seems like a better way to do things to me.
@nzzp said in Is this thing sustainable?:
And failing spectacularly along the way.
NASA weren't exactly great over the years either. Even with government funding and a politically driven agenda over their cold war rivals. So I'll cut Elon some slack.
I realise what you're saying wasn't a crack at SpaceX, just that they have had some misses as well as hits, and yes the hits are game changers.
-
@snowy said in Is this thing sustainable?:
@nzzp said in Is this thing sustainable?:
... and they are spending way, way less and achieving a shedload more.
Yep.
No taxpayer dollars and the usual wastage. Seems like a better way to do things to me.
@nzzp said in Is this thing sustainable?:
And failing spectacularly along the way.
NASA weren't exactly great over the years either even with government funding a nd a politically driven agenda over their cold war rivals. So I'll cut Elon some slack. I know what you're saying wasn't a crack at them as well, just that they have had some misses as well as hits, and yes the hits are game changers.
I'm trying to emphasise that they are free to fail, and fail spectacularly. But, because they are privately funded, they don't care - so they are iterating to better places quickly. Starship is a prime example of this, as is attempting to land boosters. It's a feature, not a bug.
@kiwiwomble Wikipedia has this:
As of May 2012, SpaceX had operated on total funding of approximately $1 billion in its first ten years of operation. Of this, private equity provided about $200M, with Musk investing approximately $100M and other investors having put in about $100M (Founders Fund, Draper Fisher Jurvetson, ...).[80] The remainder has come from progress payments on long-term launch contracts and development contracts.
I think the payment remainder came after they put a payload into orbit. If you get the chance, read 'Liftoff' by Eric Berger. Easy read, and absolutely fascinating.
-
@nzzp said in Is this thing sustainable?:
I'm trying to emphasise that they are free to fail, and fail spectacularly. But, because they are privately funded, they don't care - so they are iterating to better places quickly. Starship is a prime example of this, as is attempting to land boosters. It's a feature, not a bug.
Oh I got it and I agree. It's the best way to get the innovation that we are seeing.
There is a reason for the expression "it's not rocket science". Rocket science is a bit tricky.
-
@snowy said in Is this thing sustainable?:
There is a reason for the expression "it's not rocket science". Rocket science is a bit tricky.
Yeah the taking off bit seems to be pretty worked out but everyone at T+1 second starts to go off the charts for Probability of Failure.
-
@nta said in Is this thing sustainable?:
@snowy said in Is this thing sustainable?:
There is a reason for the expression "it's not rocket science". Rocket science is a bit tricky.
Yeah the taking off bit seems to be pretty worked out but everyone at T+1 second starts to go off the charts for Probability of Failure.
Haha yeah. Not sure that the whole "taking off is pretty worked out" just yet if they get that freaked.
Landing a rocket thing, and using it again? Fuck.
Is this thing sustainable?