I left it out because its something that can (theoretically) be left for a more convenient time such as a weekend, so its a less one-to-one comparison. That said, thats still additional work compared to buying food.

Relative to cooking a similar meal, absolutely. Getting McDonalds takes like 5 mins and almost no effort. Less if ordering for delivery or pickup. If I want to cook myself a burger its probably going to take me like 40 minutes to makes and fry the burger, and prepare toppings. Im sure a good chef could do it much faster, but thats not me, and esspecially not after a full work day.

Edit: Plus, less directly measurable and comparable, but the time and work for planning, shopping, and dishes afterwards.

Its not really about the taste - its about the speed and convenience. If you want good food, you make your own. If you just finished a shift in a back-breaking job, and hate cooking, then its a chance to relax and free up some time.

Unfortunately, Lemmy is the only one with content that appeals to me so far (at least to my knowledge, given the near-unsearchable nature of the fediverseso far). The platforms just aren’t large enough.

People don’t want to date those who don’t value or respect them, their lives, their family, or their country? Im shocked! Shocked, I say!

I think this one is already a thing as of a few months ago, but maybe its not rolled out to your instance yet.

Its just been my personal experience browsing, sorting by new. Generally, anything that could potentially be viewed as an ad (nonetheless a paywall) gets downvoted. For example, I used to see more art shared, and often users who included watermarks (even non-disruptive ones), or links to a patreon would be immediately downvoted. I’ve also seen YouTube creators criticized here for simply selling merch. Even just a couple days ago, I commented on the same trend, and another user quickly replied to tell me its a good thing nothing here can be monitized because money ruins everything. There are exceptions, esspecially with open source software, but these seem more the exception than the norm, in my experience.

They also often rely on commissions or supporter pages to cover costs or make a living, which Lemmy is often hostile to.

Unfortunately, while it only takes one user to make these communities, there is rarely enough to maintain activity and esspecially not discussion on them. Even fairly large niches, such as Dota, rarely get more than a post or two a month, and no meaningful discussion despite it being a game that emphasizes theorycrafting so heavily.

Galahad

Eleanor

Emeline

Emeric

Lancelot

Siegfried

It absolutely can, but doesn’t always. For example, Gamer’s Nexus is well respected for their thorough and unbiased research and journalism. It would be extremely difficult for them to do so without ads and merch sales, as any products reviewed must be purchased, testing equipment needs to bought, and experts need to be hired to use said equipment. Until capitalism ceases to exist, most people who make stuff will need to find a way to fund their work, from paint brushes to high-end testing equipment. If we can’t accept this, we will rarely get creators willing to provide quality content, and what we do get will be biased towards those with the money to burn.

If used in the specific niche use cases its trained for, as long as its used as a tool and not a final product. For example, using AI to generate background elements of a complete image. The AI elements aren’t the focus, and should be things that shouldn’t matter, but it might be better to use an AI element rather than doing a bare minimum element by hand. This might be something like a blurred out environment background behind a peice of hand drawn character art - otherwise it might just be a gradient or solid colour because it isn’t important, but having something low-quality is better than having effectively nothing.

In a similar case, for multidisciplinary projects where the artists can’t realistically work proficiently in every field required, AI assets may be good enough to meet the minimum requirements to at least complete the project. For example, I do a lot of game modding - I’m proficient with programming, game/level design, and 3D modeling, but not good enough to make dozens of textures and sounds that are up to snuff. I might be able to dedicate time to make a couple of most key resources myself or hire someone, but seeing as this is a non-commercial, non-monitized project I can’t buy resources regularly. AI can be a good enough solution to get the project out the door.

In the same way, LLM tools can be good if used as a way to “extend” existing works. Its a generally bad idea to rely entirely on them, but if you use it to polish a sentence you wrote, come up with phrasing ideas, or write your long if-chain for you, then it’s a way of improving or speeding up your work.

Basically, AI tools as they are, should be seen as another tool by those in or adjacent to the related profession - another tool in the toolbox rather than a way to replace the human.

The the infamous Weimar Republic mark was only one 4.2 trillionth of a dollar. This is a quadrillion x quadrillion dollars.

Like:

• Decentralized system that limits abuse

• Great customizaion

• It works (unlike much of the competition)

Dislike:

• Lack of even remotely niche content (aside from Linux and infosec content)

• Generally very pessimistic userbase

• Lacks polish and features in many areas

• Currently trends towards extremist echo chambers - the fact that .ml (an instance known for banning criticism of violent, racist, authoritarian governments) is one of the biggest instances, is a good example of this.

• tends to be extremely hostile to any sort of monitization, regardless of the quality or cost to produce content

Yeah, that sounds very similar in strategy. TTT is a deception game built on top of the fps video game, Counter Strike - its a pretty typical deception game, one team of innocents with a revealed detective role, and a few hidden traitors amongst them. The main difference compared to a lot of deception games is just that everyone will have weapons and can kill others at any time, often in a fraction of a second. Because fights are so short and bloody, everyone is typically extra jumpy and information that would normally be obvious is easily lost, which makes it perfect for exactly that sort of manipulative play.

Any good play in a deception game - esspecially an open-ended one - feels so bad.

In particular, the example that comes to mind is when you create an alliance with a friend in TTT with you as a traitor and them an innocent: manipulating them into killing a bunch of their friendly innocents with you, before you shoot them in the back of the head to win the game.

Depends a lot on the cat. Mine just started scratching the wall beside it instead.

Stop clicking on those articles, esspecially on platforms that they actually care about, like Facebook and Twitter.

I’m not sure why you’re bringing “fairness” into this. We’re not talking about one group that has wronged another. These are human behaviors and reaction to prior behaviors. There’s no system in place to enforce “fairness” in the way you’re talking about.

Fair is subjective, but in the context specifics aren’t important beyond treating employees as people who deserve to be able to not starve to death or die of overworking.

If you’re advocating for such a system to be created, then there’s some possibilities there such as employers certifying (under penalty of law) to treat employee candidates with certain rights, and likewise employee candidates could be certifed to actually hold the credentials the employer is requiring for the position. All of those rules will have to be set up and agreed to, and will cost money which has to come from somewhere.

I don’t have anything specific I’m advocating for aside from the more common sense, foundational stuff like worker protections, social safety nets, and anti-monopoly law. That said, I don’t think a legally regulated job board would be a bad idea as a band-aid solution. Maybe I’m missing something, but I wouldn’t expect it to be difficult to develop or run. As you said, companies could set minimum requirements such as being with 50km, or having a specific degree. It could be used to help keep companies accountable too, such as requiring a minimum salary be listed or tieing it in to other government programs. In terms of funding, I expect fines for fraudulent postings and applications would be enough to fund most of it, but you could also potentially require something like a deposit on postings, to be returned when (and if) the position is filled. That said, this is entirely me spitballing,

Saying the problem is just because people hire and fire too often is such a massive oversimplification. If that was the main factor, the market wouldn’t be anywhere near as bad as it is, and it wouldn’t take hundreds of applications just to get an interview. Theres a whole plethora of issues from governments of developed nations usually adding loopholes to labor laws for foreign workers to supress wages, to the complete lack of competition/antitrust enforcement, to the increased push from companies and moronic liberatarians to remove social safety nets forcing people into abusive jobs, to the number of buinesses that have discovered that they can just use postings to collect valuable data rather than to hire. This is what has caused the market to break down - bad employee retention doesn’t help, but that alone would be a small scale problem that weighs down the company practicing it.

If they dont like the mass posting on their platforms, they can start having a more humane process.

That was the reason I was complaining - even companies trying to hire honestly and humanely can’t function at this point. The whole system is starting to come apart because the few at the top are too greedy and incompetent to even attempt to fix things. We need actual, enforced worker protections, and we need those in power to stop trying to prop up megacompanies, or the system will just continue to cave in on itself.