Same. And then I upgraded to the new Dell 14 Pro Premium, where webcam does not work (as for any IPU7 laptop for that matter). The rest is fine though, but still annoying.
WWWBoard is such a nostalgia hit. My local music venue's forum was where my early internet persona originated. Sometimes I nostalgic and use Wayback machine to see what all my fellow teenagers were talking about 25 years ago.
Fun fact: WWWBoard had a brief cameo in the movie "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back" -- their official community site used the script for many years after most had moved on.
I tried both models. I could easily tell Maya was AI, but Miles sounded so lifelike that I felt that initial apprehension like hopping on a conference line with strangers. I even chuckled at one of his side remarks. It was strange knowing it wasn’t a real person, but it was very hard not to feel like it was.
most of the significant generative AI runs on a potato, and runs well on any modern GPU, obviously SotA models have worth but I have not touched a paid service since Llama was leaked and I use AI a ton in my day to day, for the rote replacing stack overflow type shit I used ChatGPT for a local copy of llama, gemma, mixtral or whatever is more than enough
What would you hope to gain from a “more reliable” source when the DailyCaller article links to the sources of its claims? Do you not even bother to read something if it’s from a source you don’t frequently read?
I've never heard of this site but the about us starts with:
> Founded in 2010 by Tucker Carlson
The homepage has a headline of "Owning the libs" and the paid members section seem to be called "Patriots".
Clearly there's some different agenda besides reporting the news. This is a low budget version of something like Breitbart and I won't bother reading the article.
If you carefully pick the start and end dates, you can report a 42% increase in a (noisy but) essentially flat line. See the other comment by ajross below, or go look at the chart yourself. The problem here is the interpretation of the data.
They carefully picked the most recent data available, and interpreted it correctly.
The media is reporting that the public perception is that crime is going up when it is going down, but if the victimization survey is correct, the public perception is that crime is going up when it is going up.
That doesn't mean the public perception hasn't been wrong in the past - it has - but it wasn't wrong during the period of the most recent available data, again, if the victimization survey rather than the FBI data is correct.
That article provides no data to show that the conglomerates mentioned “own nearly everything”. It would be quite easy to add up their US revenues and compare that number to US consumer spending, but they didn’t even bother. In addition to the post’s polemical nature, it is crammed full of pop-up autoplay ads.
Plenty of goods with substitutes (ex: fast food items) have increased substantially in price since the pandemic. People are more than willing to pay historically higher prices for plenty of items that could be replaced with cheaper items.
If people are willing to pay these prices, why should companies not be raising their prices?
There has been an enormous increase in net worth of all age brackets in the US in the last few years (as of 2022 data[1]), all data points adjusted for inflation. I think this is enough to explain why consumers are paying for these items.
Feel free to experiment with this graph tool from the US Federal Reserve's website and please respond if you have any other explanations:
Net worth went up but pre-tax family income is pretty flat. This tells a story that I'm familiar with: those that can afford to invest made a lot of money, but everyday workers are no better off. You don't pay for food by selling property. So these graphs aren't convincing to me of the story you're trying to tell.
Food is an interesting one. In my experience the value of fast food is at an all time low. Before it would be half the price of a sit down place. Nowadays it's more like 80% of the price. I'm not sure what exactly happened there. I went to subway and my bill was $15. I went to a sitdown place and my bill was $19.
> those that can afford to invest made a lot of money, but everyday workers are no better off
According to those graphs, even the bottom quartile saw a substantial increase in net worth during the pandemic [1]. Sure, this is much less in absolute terms than the higher quartiles, but as a percentage increase it's actually far higher (almost 1000% between 2019 and 2022).
This doesn't detract from your point that poorer people don't benefit much from capital gains, but I think it's still worth pointing out.
A company being part of the supply chain for a lot of goods certainly means something but it doesn't mean they "own everything". They have suppliers of their own, and are themselves suppliers to other companies (grocery stores) before it gets to you.
Which one is the most aligned with your interests is a difficult question, or at least not one I know the answer to, but it's probably not whichever one is the smallest business.
If Republicans are voting against it too they are also to blame though? If some Republicans would vote for it then it could pass. I'm an Australian so maybe there is nuance here I'm missing about how the US of A's legislative process works, but I don't understand why you think they don't deserve some culpability and a mention?
* Doesn't have enough votes in congress, even though 95% of a single caucus that makes up 50% supports it because 10% of votes have to come from another caucus.
If 49% votes consistently binary; and another party has 5% on a gradient depending on policy; and 60% of consensus + executive signing is required then no, you can't ignore the issue of having 2 parties.
reply