https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination are you high? This is the text book definition of nation building.

You’ve conflated laws and ethics. Does piracy violate some laws in some jurisdictions? Unquestionably. Is every single law ethical? Unlikely.

No, this is the capitalist trying to convince customers (investors) that they have more capital than the other capitalists. Nothing about this has anything to do with workers.

Hear me out: what if repealing section 230 would end up killing our social media monoculture, since it would be impossible for these platforms to operate. Instead, what if people had to host their content themselves, you know, like we did back in the day, when the Internet was fun.

OP didn’t specifically say “only use the parts that came out of the box”. It’s still ambiguous. Are official mods, like PRUSA MMU modifying? How about after market parts?

Let me propose a modification tier list:

• M1 replace a part with a functionally identical one, e.g. replace worn nozzle.
• M2 upgrade using an official kit provided by the manufacturer to a new, fully versioned design, e.g. Mk3 to Mk3S
• M3 replace or add a part with an after market part to achieve improved or different performance, e.g. replace brass nozzle with hardened steel nozzle sold by third party
• M4 replace a part designed by the community
• M5 design and replace a part yourself for your own custom needs.

I’ve personally done all 5. I can’t imagine everyone has done all tiers of modifications.

This is all kinda moot. There will be no companies to run when the economy crashes because there is no one to buy goods (or even to pay taxes to support government spending). It’s a giant house of cards.

Neither. Version control and remote sync to your self hosted gitlab or gitea, or whatever (or no remote at all if you wanna go gambling with your hard drive).

AI, crypto, just like .com, are very much very real, valuable technologies that have and will continue to stick around and be used until we destroy ourselves, or something even more advanced comes along.

What was/is a grift, is all the stupid money and people around it that don’t have a damn clue where the limits of the technologies actually lie, what kinds of real problems are solved and have been sold lies stop lies without doing their due diligence.

Is the objective to “reclaim control over your technology”, or is it to be a single purpose device? I can think of a lot of single purpose devices loaded with subscriptions and telemetry, and just as many general purpose computing platforms without that crap that let you be in control.

Enshitification was coined by Cory Doctrow specifically for the tech space, because the tech space is uniquely poised to constantly shift and tweak a service-based product to manipulate users, creators, and the paying customers.

I call this enshittification, and it is a seemingly inevitable consequence arising from the combination of the ease of changing how a platform allocates value, combined with the nature of a “two sided market,” where a platform sits between buyers and sellers, holding each hostage to the other, raking off an ever-larger share of the value that passes between them.

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/

This is on top of the normal problem of greed. Now I didn’t read the article because it is pay walled (go figure). Is this article actually drawing a correct comparison to the definition of enshitification above, or is it just lazily ascribing the phenomenon of greed to that word?

This wouldn’t pass PR review and automated tests, unless they were a senior dev and used elevated privileges to mess with things behind the scenes.

I’m not sure how you come to this conclusion. For every example of a capitalist avoiding risky investments, there are 100 capitalists betting on the next innovation.

Venture capital. Heard the term? AI, Metaverse, crypto, web 2.0, .com… The tech space alone is full of capital making (stupidly risky) bets. They also make good bets too, like PC, search engines, online shopping (oh, look how the tech giants came to be).

I get it, capitalism bad. But this is just a nonsensical argument.

But no doubt we’ll have a future where info is right there if we want it.

But we’re already there. It’s called a smartphone.

The value add of replacing a pocket watch or a cellphone with a device about the same size that also fits in your pocket but also gives you access to all the world’s information in seconds is immense. And that’s why the smartphone revolutionized the world.

The value add of having that information strapped to your face at all times is… just not worth the physical discomfort of having said device strapped to your face.

I say this as a VR user. A device strapped over your face really sucks and you can’t wait to take it off. The only reason to tolerate it is that that’s the only way to trick your senses into thinking you are somewhere else.

https://shinobi.video

It’s not weird. Just a cult.

Apple has always had a walled garden on iOS and that didn’t stop them from becoming a giant in the US. Most people are fine with the App Store and don’t care about openness or the ability to do whatever they want with the device they “own.”

Uh. No. In the consumer space, maybe, but in the business and professional world, Windows essentially still has a monopoly.

And therein is the crux of the argument of the author: the vision pro is not marketed, or priced for the consumer market. It is marketed, and priced for the business world, and compromises on build immensely, by failing to provide consumers with consumable content and failing to give professionals the general purpose computing needed for actual productivity (developers, developers, developers!).

The author says that because of this compromise, it will likely fail in that segment (the only commercially viable segment at that price point) for the same reason that Mac’s never captured some of Window’s market share (hipster design studio full of Macs and iPads are loud and proud, but still insignificant market share).

To add to what has already been said about it taking a large effort, the follow up question is then, why don’t governments fund all this effort publicly through taxes, like what is done with roads, scientific research, education, healthcare?

Well the short answer is that high-performance computing specifically is a strategic resource. Publicly funding roads only benefits the country doing the funding, so that is an easy decision to make. Meanwhile, much of the publicly funded scientific research has minimal to no strategic value (or may only be of value in states capable of that investment in the first place), so this is also an easy decision to make. But giving away technological investments in strategic ressources to rival states is a pretty bad move.

FYI, fans of FF7 have been clamouring for a remake for over two decades now. So yes, people are really excited.

Except perhaps those who are disappointed that the remake isn’t how they have imagined it. And fair enough, but let’s be happy we got one at all, and that it isn’t just some shovel ware that a lot of properties are pushing out.

“Social media” just means a public place where the plebs can upload content and interact with other plebs via the internet without knowing a lick of html, Internet culture, or anything technical really. If they are so lucky, some might even be graced by the attention of a minor internet celebrity, the modern day patricians.

Coincidentally, also why I don’t care much for most social media content.