And there’s only one species of wild cabbage, Brassica oleracea. Get out of here with that “broccoli”, “kale”, “cabbage” or “brussel sprouts” nonsense!

Low voltage, high frequency: I thought I was safe 😭

Except that’s not even how most bus systems work because most of them are majority funded by taxes with fares originally meant to serve as a stopgap but then slowly converted into a profit engine (usually after privitization). Fares are a way to gatekeep a service which your taxes already pay for, which I would argue, is by itself a form of theft.

As an example check out the latest MTA report only 26% of funding comes from fares, and that ones a bit in the higher end from what I’ve seen (NYC public transit, picked as the example a it’s recently been in the news for issues with fare evasion)

All that aside, it’s also worth noting that fare increases are extremely unpopular and it’s not that easy to increase them without potential serious backlash (ie the mass protests in Chile a few years back that were in part set off by the fare hikes.)

in aware A# w# > Tw# I

Exactly, hence the root of the problem the original meme is getting at…

For healthy working relationships and solid infrastructure you under-promise and over-deliver.

For maximal profit and sustainable business models you over-promise and under-deliver.

If you build a base on/near a bunch of ore nodes and dedicate it entirely to mining your pals will mine it for you and it respawns daily (passive ore generation ftw!!!)

Great, my work is done. I’ve done a lobby and convinced you that Lobbying doesn’t actually change anything and that you’ll have to actually do something. And now I can sleep easy knowing that you’ll fix it all for me!

Right, which is why I’m saying that your ‘solution’ is nothing. It boils down to: “Lobby!(1) Then go home(2), sit and wait(3)”

1. With your loads of cash and free time.
2. Which of course everyone has.
3. Which is a luxury we can certainly all afford.

So to summarize your suggestions are:

lobbying the government

not negotiating alone against big pharma (lobbying again)

Calmly and nicely agrue your case.

we have a capitalist system and that is a good way of stopping the bleeding.

Again, none of those answer the question. Those are all “do nothing and trust those with power and authority to do the right thing.” It’s the definition of useless liberalism and displays quite the level of privilege and disconnect from reality.

You can easily look up how completely ineffective those solutions are, if you care. Did you even read the article this comment thread is posted under?

You didn’t answer the question.

ban bad technoligies.

How? The niches for those technologies are created and maintained by those same people you want to do a complete 180 and ban-hammer them instead.

set up non-capitalist structures

How? Using your example you have to either manufacture and distribute said cancer medicine yourself. Which is a crime… And at they point it’s probably more effective to just straight up rob a pharmacy and redistribute, robin hood style. I hope I don’t need to go into detail how that’s not a real answer/solution…

(Sidenote: https://fourthievesvinegar.org/ is very cool and doing some work in this sort of direction, but it should stand as an example of how complicated and largely inefective at scale that approach is.)

change planing priorities.

So go to approval hearings and throw a fit until you are arrested and they build the car based infrastructure anyways?

add hidden costs as real costs.

Oooh neoclassical economics!!! So how should I bill you for my time writing this comment?

It’s not, the underlying data is still just as biased. Taking a bunch of white people and saying they are “ethnically ambiguous” is just statistical blackface.

The academic name for the field is quite literally “machine learning”.

You are incorrect that these systems are unable to create/be creative, you are correct that creativity != consciousness (which is an extremely poorly defined concept to begin with …) and you are partially correct about how the underlying statistical models work. What you’re missing is that by defining a probabilistic model to objects you can “think”/“be creative” because these models dont need to see a “blue hexagonal strawberry” in order to think about what that may mean and imagine what it looks like.

I would recommend this paper for further reading into the topic and would like to point out you are again correct that existing AI systems are far from human levels on the proposed challenges, but inarguably able to “think”, “learn” and “creatively” solve those proposed problems.

The person you’re responding to isn’t trying to pick a fight they’re trying to help show you that you have bought whole cloth into a logical fallacy and are being extremely defensive about it to your own detriment.

That’s nothing to be embarrassed about, the “LLMs can’t be creative because nothing is original, so everything is a derivative work” is a dedicated propaganda effort to further expand copyright and capital consolidation.