Either way it’s going to organized crime. At least the crypto scammers are unlikely to influence the election!

That would be nice but I don’t think it would have as much impact as you think. People who own multiple dwellings are a tiny minority of owners.

Capital gains tax doesn’t apply to your principal residence.

I think you’re still going to alienate teachers with that kind of shuffling. People form relationships with their colleagues. This is especially the case at universities where your coworker may be one of a handful of people on the planet who actually understands your research.

But also I think you may overrate the impact of teaching skill on student outcomes. Universities barely teach their students at all. Apart from lectures, they assign course work and conduct examinations. By far the majority of learning in university takes place alone, when the student engages with the course work. It’s often the case that students will pass a course with a decent grade having never attended a single lecture.

The truth of the matter is that most of the value of a highly selective university is the selectivity. There’s nothing that makes a teacher look brilliant more than having brilliant students. The top schools like Harvard could honestly eliminate lectures entirely, just keeping coursework and examinations, and their students would still be the most sought after.

Yesterday was my convocation day. So yes!

You could hire a hundred times as many grad students into the tenure track but that still wouldn’t stop people from competing to study with the best ones.

The brutal, national, standardized exam is what you get when you eliminate all the other barriers to going to university. It means every single student is in competition with one another to get accepted.

Shuffling staff around between schools just sounds like a great way to drive all the best researchers to the private sector while driving all the best teachers out of the profession entirely. Forcing people to move around to different cities for their job means you are selecting heavily for a particular “nomadic” type of person without any attachments to the local community. Sounds absolutely awful to foist that on educational institutions who really ought to be in the business of fostering community.

Everything these AIs output is a hallucination. Imagine if you were locked in a sensory deprivation tank, completely cut off from the outside world, and only had your brain fed the text of all books and internet sites. You would hallucinate everything about them too. You would have no idea what was real and what wasn’t because you’d lack any epistemic tools for confirming your knowledge.

That’s the biggest reason why AIs will always be bullshitters as long as their disembodied software programs running on a server. At best they can be a brain in a vat which is a pure hallucination machine.

It’s not that easy. If you don’t police at all then it only takes one person to ruin things for everyone. This is the tragedy of the commons. On the other hand, you can spend exponentially more and more on policing you get diminishing returns and increased corruption and waste.

At the end of the day, there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch!

Any unwanted item forced upon a family will go uneaten and become 100% waste. An item that most people don’t want that sits on the shelf at least stands a chance of being taken by someone who will eat it.

Food banks regularly communicate their needs to donors so that the most commonly needed staples will have abundant stock. In the hamper model where you’re just forcing people to take stuff then you don’t actually know what’s being used, what’s most commonly needed, and what you can mostly ignore.

There are an estimated 720,000 hours of video uploaded to YouTube per day. At 8 hours per day it would take 90,000 people just to watch all those videos, working 7 days per week with no breaks and no time spent doing anything else apart from watching.

Now take into account that YouTube users watch over a billion hours of video per day and consider that even one controversial video might get millions of different reports. Who is going to read through all of those and verify whether the video actually depicts what is being claimed?

A Hollywood studio, on the other hand, produces maybe a few hundred to a few thousand hours of video per year (unless they’re Disney or some other major TV producer). They can afford to have a legal team of literally dozens of lawyers and technology consultants who just spend all their time scanning YouTube for videos to take down and issuing thousands to millions of copyright notices. Now YouTube has made it easy for them by giving them a tool to take down videos directly without any review. How long do you think it would take for YouTube employees to manually review all those cases?

And then what happens when the Hollywood studio disagrees with YouTube’s review decision and decides to file a lawsuit instead? This whole takedown process began after Viacom filed a $1 billion lawsuit against YouTube!

I’m not sure what you mean by “true cost of business.” The biggest cost here is the issue of copyright claims and takedowns which were created by law in the first place, not by a natural phenomenon.

No matter what system we design, you’ll find that people adapt to take advantage of it. Well-meaning laws frequently have large and nasty unintended consequences. One of the biggest examples I can think of is the copyright system — originally intended to reward artists — which has led to big publishers monopolizing our culture.

Google is absolutely allergic to hiring humans for manual review. They view it as an existential issue because they have billions of users which means they’d need to hire millions of people to do the review work.

How is that any different from construction or longshoremen unions? Both also with deep ties to organized crime, acting as a parasite on the economy.

Meta’s not behaving in the slightest. Their entire business model is illegal under the GDPR. They will continue maliciously complying for as long as they can. Just like Apple. Fight tooth and nail for as long as it takes.

Apple’s going to fight all of this tooth and nail, country by country, to the end of time. Anything less and they risk a shareholder lawsuit.

This is billions and billions of dollars we’re talking about, not chump change.

“Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos!”

WhatsApp is owned by Meta.

There are player-run servers for MMORPGs such as Ultima Online and EverQuest. If the developers released the server software the fans wouldn’t have to implement their own (which they did for those two games). If the company is no longer running their own servers they are no longer making money from subscriptions so they won’t lose money to competition from player-run servers.

These guys would get expelled from kindergarten for antisocial behaviour!

Gitlab is open source. You can download it and host it yourself. A decentralized developer community is resilient against this sort of attack for the very reason GitHub is so vulnerable: size.

Git was always designed with decentralized development and collaboration in mind. Its creator, Linus Torvalds, prefers not to bother with servers like GitHub at all. Git can even be used entirely over email (Linus’s preference)!