Oh, K and not C.

I’m an idiot.

Sorry if I wasn’t clear- TAFCAP. The Artist Formerly Known As Prince.

I only watch it, friend. No one wants to see me take part.

You could be right. I have absolutely no idea.

That makes sense. It would also obviously depend on how much porn there is that exists with people who have that accent (or language). The ratio of Australian-made porn to American-made porn might be like comparing a peanut to an elephant. I admit I can’t really remember encountering much Australian-accent porn here in the U.S.

Dude. NSFW.

Bah. My star sign stays the same in this adjusted version. And I don’t even get a horse racing tip.

All that said, “What month were you born in?” would have been a much better question for the reasons OP notes.

We were discussing this in the atheism community and the advantage of zodiac sign over birth month is that there is not an even overlap between months and zodiac signs, so 30% of people will be born in a different month than the one associated with the sign. I’m one of these. I was born near the end of the month so the sign I would be associated with is not the sign people associate with the month.

Don’t get me wrong, I think this was a stupid security question, but it’s less stupid than it first sounds because of that.

I think it’s at a sort of weird crossroads between superstition and factual data, because it is trivial to calculate the factual data regarding the position of any star in the sky at any point, but the superstition comes in when you associate the positions of a rather arbitrary group of stars in relation to a date of birth.

I just thought of this though- you could argue that this is an anti-astrology security measure because it proves that you can’t guess someone’s zodiac sign based on things like their interests and personality traits.

People should listen to the entirety of Guthrie’s This Land is Your Land rather than the part that’s excerpted that makes it sound super patriotic rah rah America.

In the shadow of the steeple I saw my people,
By the relief office I seen my people;
As they stood there hungry, I stood there asking
Is this land made for you and me?

I’m not generally a fan of Rosie O’Donnel or her comedy, but my roommate at the time used to watch her talk show, and she first started calling Prince “Tafcap” and then eventually went to “Taffy.” That was pretty funny.

But in terms of actual information it could be worse thanks to AI hallucinations and poor training materials.

Insulting me twice in a row will likely not have the effect you wanted because I will neither insult you back nor continue this discussion. I have no interest in Reddit-style insult matches with strangers. Goodbye.

I stopped reading at “you’re clearly a child.” If this is going to devolve into insults, I’m not interested. I’m not surprised you think that is the level of discourse to stoop to, however.

The limitations would be innate.

That’s not how software works.

Especially if it were tied to renewable resources, there’s a finite amount of resources on the planet even with renewables which can’t be 100% renewable by default.

Until new technology is developed that makes the whole thing significantly cheaper and then the market drops out and since there’s no governing body, the global economy crashes and there’s another Great Depression. Macroeconomics does not seem to be your strong suit.

People work because they have an innate drive to do so.

There are not enough people who have an “innate drive” to do every job that needs doing in a modern society. No one has an “innate drive” to work at a factory because we didn’t evolve to work in factories. People don’t even have any sort of “innate drive” to farm, because we evolved to hunt and gather, two things that generally aren’t necessary anymore.

Look at firefighters and search and rescue for example. Most are volunteer (at least where I am) and they run into burning buildings to rescue people for no money. Or they’re hiking into remote wilderness in awful conditions (deep snow, -20F outside, high winds, miles from civilization, huge cliffs to fall off of and die) to rescue lost skiers and hikers. Hell there’s plenty of rich people who could retire yesterday and live their lives out drinking Mai tais on the beach without a care in the world and yet for some reason they still show up to work, because they want to.

Please do tell me about all of these people who want to be mining things because they find mining so enjoyable.

I doubt people would be doing stupid pointless jobs pushing papers around in circles if they weren’t financially manipulated to do so.

And yet those jobs are also necessary, because things need to be recorded for future reference, so how do you get people to do them if you don’t pay them? Yes, they sound pointless. Anyone who has actually worked those jobs can tell you why those papers are pushed around.

Again, it literally quotes the god of Libertarian economics, Friedrich Hayek.

Graphs without context do not give a good picture of what actually happened. It certainly doesn’t discuss the negative effect Reagan had on the economy or the positive effect Obama had.

The second threat is the rise of “answer engines” like Perplexity which, well, do what they say on the tin. OpenAI has added internet search to ChatGPT, Meta Platforms is exploring building its own search engine, and even AI chatbots that can’t search the internet are proving increasingly capable at addressing many questions. They’re also becoming ever more widespread, as Microsoft and Appleintegrate them directly into the operating systems of all the devices they make or support.

That is not an improvement, it’s just also not really any worse.

Who puts those limitations on it? Who gets to decide what those limitations are? Would those limits be baked-in forever (terrible idea) or changeable when new economic situations we might not even have thought of 10 years earlier arise?

Seems to me the global body I am talking about would be the rational people to be in control of all that.

As far as preferring a moneyless society, how would you propose people be encouraged to do dangerous but necessary jobs like mining for important minerals or servicing high voltage electrical cables if they aren’t going to be paid to do it? I think you’ll find that people generally don’t do those jobs because they think they’re fun.

I don’t mean anarchy in the sense you mean it, I mean it’s total chaos.

And no, in the case of currency, more decentralized means no one knows what the price of milk is from week to week. Currencies need stability or they are not very useful. Hyperinflation is not an imaginary scenario.

Those are not pictures of bank notes used by super rich people. Quite the opposite:

I don’t have a solution for stopping bad actors

Yes you do, you just don’t like it. The solution is a global governing and regulating body.

That’s why I put learned in quotes. It was a con. He was pretending. He also lied constantly and got caught doing it all the time.