I have no idea. But maybe the gravitational location would appear to asymptotically approach the event horizon similar to how light from an object would appear to just approach the horizon and then stay there.

If you insist. Would you be so kind as to stop commenting on my comment then as well?

Why do you do this?

Why?

Do you not want answers? I didn’t mind the question, I just think you need to refine what you’re taking about.

What even is AI? You love diffusion based image generation? Global parameter transformer text generation? Good old fashioned optimizers? The category of AI seems to broad for your statement to make sense.

They’re just built with 1 by X bricks. But I kinda like that, it’s not replacing anything a person would design. I think I’d prefer a program that would take a 3d model as in input instead of a text prompt, but both are cool.

Do you think you can have effective communism with only self interested parties? That was my take away from your comment, that you can get communism as a logical extension of greedy motives?

When someone says capitalism is human nature, I don’t think they mean that industrial automation allowing unskilled workers is human nature. So they’re using a different meaning of capitalism. To address their concern, you would show counter examples of large groups of people working together for a common good rather than their own enrichment. Rather than just saying they’re using the word wrong.

When you survey people on the street, would they use that definition? English isn’t a prescriptive language, the definition is what people use it as.

I don’t think the Marxist definition of capitalism lines up with the colloquial definition. Colloquially, it’s thought of as systems in which money is exchanged for goods and services. As opposed to communism, where it is not. (These are both oversimplified)

When people say capitalism has been around for thousands of years, what they mean is the colloquial definition. Redefining their terms with the Marxist version doesn’t address their actual point.

I don’t think the Marxist definition of capitalism lines up with the colloquial definition. Colloquially, it’s thought of as systems in which money is exchanged for goods and services. As opposed to communism, where it is not. (These are both oversimplified)

When people say capitalism has been around for thousands of years, what they mean is the colloquial definition. Redefining their terms with the Marxist version doesn’t address their actual point.

But you’d say that capitalism requires the technological advancements of the industrial revolution by definition?

I was asking to clarify, because it sounded like your definition of capitalism was something like ‘uses industrial machinery to allow for unskilled work.’ By that definition, I agree that by definition capitalism didn’t exist till after the industrial revolution, since industrial machinery didn’t exist yet. But I disagree that capitalism requires industrial machinery.

Ceramics (roof tiles and pots) were manufactured on an industrial scale in Rome for example. They employed workers and produced massive numbers of products.

What is your distinction between employing people for money and capitalism?

What would you call employing people for wages around 0AD? I don’t think it’s feudalism.

I wonder why they mirrored the background? Was it added in post I guess?

b|ɘiW

Isn’t Nolan one of the more approved of directors among movie nerds?

https://hexos.com/ is also trying to be a low skill low effort version of truenas, but it does have a one time payment. I didn’t think you’d need a nas specific OS for just one storage laptop though, it’s more meant for large home storage servers.