PuddleOfKittens's recent activity
-
Comment on If AI can diagnose patients, what are doctors for? in ~health
-
Comment on What game is your personal "Silksong"? in ~games
PuddleOfKittens LinkAs long as "waited a long time for" means "put off buying for years after launch", I'd say my Silksong would be Redout. I thought it was cool in TotalBiscuit's review, but didn't buy it for a few...As long as "waited a long time for" means "put off buying for years after launch", I'd say my Silksong would be Redout. I thought it was cool in TotalBiscuit's review, but didn't buy it for a few years. My only real criticism is that it flubbed the campaign - a campaign should be more than just a list of levels unlocked sequentially, it should have some level of flavor (story, cutscenes, feels) and Redout doesn't have that. The gameplay is rock solid, and so are the aesthetics and UX.
Failing that, probably Halo 3?
-
Comment on If AI can diagnose patients, what are doctors for? in ~health
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentI think it's really unfair that people compare AI to incredibly expensive professionals, instead of some random off Fiverr. An AI can very cheaply diagnose you, but so can Some Guy On Fiverr. The...AI is not capable of many things that people think it can do right.
I think it's really unfair that people compare AI to incredibly expensive professionals, instead of some random off Fiverr. An AI can very cheaply diagnose you, but so can Some Guy On Fiverr. The AI will probably screw up, lie about basic and verifiable facts, but so will Some Guy On Fiverr.
-
Comment on We’re seniors. It’s not our responsibility to fix the housing supply. in ~society
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentI'm not actually advocating for that law. I'm trying to illustrate the absurdity of your statement. Political advocacy is an action with consequences that people can be judged by and reacted to....I'm not actually advocating for that law. I'm trying to illustrate the absurdity of your statement. Political advocacy is an action with consequences that people can be judged by and reacted to.
FWIW, what I do advocate is for basically whatever it takes to relieve supply, including banning local govt from constraining development in any way by making development approval exclusively a state-govt domain (not just for political reasons but because it rarely makes sense for local govts to hire town planners, and thus local govt's town planning laws are frequently ignorant of expert advice).
I also advocate for more construction of public housing - because there's an argument that the problem may be contributed to by private developers constraining supply at hyper-local levels (i.e. if you're the only builder building new houses in the suburb of Whatsville and you've built a ton of housing all at once, then maybe you want to trickle those houses onto the market to avoid flooding the market in Whatsville specifically), and public housing can essentially act as a guaranteed competitor to discourage that.
I especially advocate for ditching restrictions on single-family homes and minimum lot sizes though, because the best way to reduce prices is for lots of small developers to e.g. buy a single 1-storey house, split it in half with two developers paying half of the house's price each, and build two 3-storey apartment blocks in the spot. Or split the housing lot into 3; I've seen it done.
I don't think people preserving their neighborhoods is done with the intent of increasing anyone's cost of living.
You're drawing a distinction between apathy and hate here, and you're not wrong but it's completely irrelevant. And I would push back against the 'intent' comment - as a parable, a literal scammer doesn't want their victims to lose money, they simply want themselves to gain the money, and the only available options to do so are for them to gain money at the victims expense, or for them not to. While they're primarily choosing to gain money themselves, they are simultaneously inextricably choosing for their victims to lose the money as a means to that end. NIMBYs want to benefit themselves at the cost of the rest of society, and if they don't already know it then they're just turning a blind eye. And at the end of the day, I don't care why they're harming me and most people I know.
Seriously, see this:
secondarily to preserve their investment/property value.
Investment value is the cost of housing. If someone wanted to make themselves wealthy by keeping the cost of groceries artificially high, you would obviously call them a ghoul.
The rest of the causes are economic forces I can't remember enough of to talk about.
I fully agree that the economic forces are extensive and hard to remember and talk about.
I also don't think preserving neighborhoods is the cause of the housing shortage. One part of the cause is corporations buying houses.
This isn't really the case, AFAICT. First up: there's no difference between corporations speculatively buying houses, and literally any other investor speculatively buying houses. If it's "the rich", it doesn't matter whether it's in your name or in your LLC's name. "Corporations" is a thought-terminating cliche here, honestly. It sounds like an explanation but it's not.
The number of corporations who own houses is IIRC ~1%, so it's still not a good explanation.
But far more importantly than all of that: speculatively purchasing housing is only effective if supply is constrained. Otherwise, speculators will dump billions into buying up an entire city's worth of housing, only for developers to come in and build another city's worth of housing. And housing speculation only works if housing prices are consistently going up! So more supply can cause a double-whammy of relieving demand and also bankrupting speculators who were hoarding supply.
The numbers bear out the fact that cities that are consistently building lots of housing, don't increase housing prices above inflation rate. IIRC I got that from a Construction Physics post.
The point is, if there is one thing that drives the housing shortage, it's constrained supply. And NIMBYism is the epitome of constraining supply (usually by driving up delays and costs so far that it's either unprofitable to build in the first place - and therefore nobody builds - or it's extremely costly to build, and so the housing construction can never reduce the cost of housing much, because those build costs need to be passed onto the customer.
-
Comment on YouTube capitulates to US President Donald Trump in ~society
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentCompanies don't like publicly paying Trump, they know it's bad PR for basically everyone - to anti-Trumpers, it's capitulation, and to pro-Trumpers, it's an admission of wrongdoing. If they want...Companies don't like publicly paying Trump, they know it's bad PR for basically everyone - to anti-Trumpers, it's capitulation, and to pro-Trumpers, it's an admission of wrongdoing.
If they want to pay politicians, SuperPACs already give them that ability.
-
Comment on Synology caves, walks back some drive restrictions on upcoming NAS models in ~tech
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentI think there's an exception for companies that respond overwhelmingly. The best recent example of this is No Man's Sky - the game released really shoddy and Bethesda-ish, but Hello Games have...I think there's an exception for companies that respond overwhelmingly. The best recent example of this is No Man's Sky - the game released really shoddy and Bethesda-ish, but Hello Games have spent basically the last decade fixing that.
Companies that only do the right thing for profit reasons will generally only do enough to be publicly considered to have done the right thing, then they'll move on. Companies that genuinely didn't want to do the wrong thing, and regret their past action, will take a jackhammer to their mistake and do everything they possibly can to make amends.
-
Comment on YouTube capitulates to US President Donald Trump in ~society
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentTo be clear, I have a long list of Things Wrong With The US Political System. And at the #1 spot, you'll find FPTP - people voted against Hillary as much as for Trump, and if Bernie had run...To be clear, I have a long list of Things Wrong With The US Political System. And at the #1 spot, you'll find FPTP - people voted against Hillary as much as for Trump, and if Bernie had run against Hillary and Trump then he could have won outright (given that Trump voters probably won't #2 Hillary) but at least would have forced the Trump campaign to make their message "every other candidate is bad" (which would be weak and fail) instead of "specifically Hillary is bad, and Trump is literally your only other option".
Corporate lobbying and Citizens United both suck, but e.g. Zohran Mamdani proves they can be overcome, with effort.
#2 is probably the electoral college both preventing majority rule and making (some) state votes winner-take-all - tiny states have disproportionate power, and a bunch of states will give 100% of EC votes to whoever receives 51% of state-voter votes. This makes entire swathes of the country electorally irrelevant, i.e. is less democratic than a proper simple majority-rule system.
Corporate lobbying and Citizens United is probably somewhere in the #3-6 range, and the Presidential System is probably way past #10. I've only been thinking about it a lot due to my own country (Australia) being a parliamentary system, with one state (Queensland) not even having two houses (AKA is unicameral). I've always wondered whether the parliamentary system was better or just more risky, and Trump has answered that nicely.
-
Comment on YouTube capitulates to US President Donald Trump in ~society
PuddleOfKittens Linktl;dr the legal system doesn't matter if the executive is willing to arbitrarily and illegally fuck you over, so big tech companies are resorting to bribery. IMO, this demonstrates that the US's...tl;dr the legal system doesn't matter if the executive is willing to arbitrarily and illegally fuck you over, so big tech companies are resorting to bribery.
IMO, this demonstrates that the US's presidential republic doesn't work -at the end of the day, the executive can do anything unless someone actively stops them from doing so. Congress doesn't matter unless they have an extreme majority opposed to the president; if it's deadlocked then any opposition to the executive is deadlocked by extension. The "checks and balances" that try to check by preventing action actually backfire and prevent anyone from stopping the rogue executive.
IMO, the US presidency should be stripped out and replaced with a prime minister (i.e. the "president" is whoever holds majority in congress), because since ~2010 the US has had all the downsides of a deadlock from a presidency and congress opposing one another, but the supposed upsides of a separated congress have failed to materialize in the one time they would be useful.
And frankly, that deadlocking caused Trump in the first place - the inability for the executive to legally reform an obviously broken system were what led 2016 voters to desire a "burn down the world" candidate and therefore vote in Trump instead of Clinton. It's been a deliberate strategy of the Republicans to exploit exactly this - deliberately deadlock and then heckle the "do-nothing Democrats".
Fundamentally, "checks and balances" favor the status quo. But for the general public to support democracy in the first place, the pro-democracy candidates must be able to improve the system and address the pain points of voters, and so a democracy that's locked into the status quo is a democracy that's collapsing. So checks and balances must be carefully balanced with The Ability To Get Shit Done.
-
Comment on We’re seniors. It’s not our responsibility to fix the housing supply. in ~society
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentThere's no law against lobbying for a law confiscating all boomer housing. And if your primary defence here is ethics, then boomer NIMBYism is artificially skyrocketing my cost of living for their...There's no law against lobbying for a law confiscating all boomer housing.
And if your primary defence here is ethics, then boomer NIMBYism is artificially skyrocketing my cost of living for their own financial gain, it's absolutely unethical. If you condemn my own hypothetical advocacy for unethical stuff, then condemn boomers for their advocacy for unethical stuff.
-
Comment on Tech companies are finding out everything is political in ~tech
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentThey redefine their preferred flavor of regulation to be the foundational bedrock of law - "everything is property". "There's no such thing as murder, only illegally using my property (stabbing...How do they figure it would have have worked....
They redefine their preferred flavor of regulation to be the foundational bedrock of law - "everything is property". "There's no such thing as murder, only illegally using my property (stabbing it) without permission."
Thus the abstract and absurd appears simple and therefore exempt from the requirements of minimalism.
If you want to see whether they actually believe it's that simple, ask them if someone in debt has to hand over all their property (their body) upon bankruptcy.
-
Comment on What's a product or service that you use but don't want to pay for and why? in ~life
PuddleOfKittens LinkYoutube. Because Fuck Google, They're A Monopoly. I'm not opposed to subscribing to Youtube, in principle. I'm just not willing to do so for them. I hate that I can't spite Youtube by going to a...Youtube. Because Fuck Google, They're A Monopoly.
I'm not opposed to subscribing to Youtube, in principle. I'm just not willing to do so for them. I hate that I can't spite Youtube by going to a competitor.
-
Comment on We’re seniors. It’s not our responsibility to fix the housing supply. in ~society
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentAnd I'm allowed to advocate for the govt confiscation of all boomer housing. And the death penalty for buying a Cybertruck. ...So? Your comment rests very heavily on an implied statement, so I...In a democratic republic ( for now ) people are allowed to advocate for the zoning laws that govern where they live.
And I'm allowed to advocate for the govt confiscation of all boomer housing. And the death penalty for buying a Cybertruck. ...So?
Your comment rests very heavily on an implied statement, so I invite you to please explicitly state that statement.
-
Comment on We’re seniors. It’s not our responsibility to fix the housing supply. in ~society
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentInvestors don't have the resources. The reality is that a properly walkable city requires not just building an entire city - which costs somewhere from billions to trillions of dollars, but also...If you can build desirable cities from scratch, why is nobody doing it? It's not like investors don't have the resources.
Investors don't have the resources.
The reality is that a properly walkable city requires not just building an entire city - which costs somewhere from billions to trillions of dollars, but also building railways in the meanwhile - both rail inside the city, and rail from the city to other cities. And building rail to other cities faces all the same problems that California HSR faces.
Once you're NYC-scale you don't need rail to other cities, but frankly building a NYC will take decades and the nascent city will wilt in the mean time.
I don't think it's possible to build at this scale without govt support - even if it's possible, it's just too risky.
It's definitely more risky than the Culdesac Tempe model of finding an empty 250m x 250m block with a light rail station nearby and just needing a passive OK from the local govt.
-
Comment on OpenAI’s H1 2025: $4.3b in income, $13.5b in loss in ~tech
PuddleOfKittens Link Parent"Hey chat, what should I do now?" "You should drink a Pepsi." ChatGPT add have unparalleled potential, because lots of people treat AI like a person they trust."Hey chat, what should I do now?"
"You should drink a Pepsi."
ChatGPT add have unparalleled potential, because lots of people treat AI like a person they trust.
-
Comment on Flush with cash and soaring with hubris, Donald Trump appointees are supersizing US Immigration and Customs Enforcement in ~society
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentIt's scalping. Lots of people hate scalping when it comes to tickets, GPUs, and toilet paper, and the main defence of scalping is basically "that's capitalism, And It's Good Actually." Ultimately...I don't think there's anything wrong with taking free stuff to resell when it was put out there with no strings attached.
It's scalping. Lots of people hate scalping when it comes to tickets, GPUs, and toilet paper, and the main defence of scalping is basically "that's capitalism, And It's Good Actually."
Ultimately it depends why you're giving stuff away: is it because you're being charitable, or because you believe the value of the goods you're trying to dispose of is ~$0? Scalping should be lauded in the latter scenario, but piss you off in the former scenario.
-
Comment on Apple pulls ICEBlock from the App Store in ~tech
PuddleOfKittens LinkThis is why it's vital that consumer devices are capable of sideloading apps - anything in the walled garden exists at the masters' pleasure.This is why it's vital that consumer devices are capable of sideloading apps - anything in the walled garden exists at the masters' pleasure.
-
Comment on Outrage over American Eagle's 'great jeans' ad was a conservative media creation in ~society
PuddleOfKittens LinkThis is increasingly becoming a pattern - when Charlie Kirk was shot, conservatives reflexively invented a narrative about how the shooter was trans. I suspect it's a deliberate strategy to craft...This is increasingly becoming a pattern - when Charlie Kirk was shot, conservatives reflexively invented a narrative about how the shooter was trans.
I suspect it's a deliberate strategy to craft the first impression, because often it's the only impression so now a ton of people will forever think Kirk's shooter was a trans leftist and not the MAGA nut he was.
It's just another form of slander - claim that they're the "common sense party" by inventing lunacy and smearing the other side with it.
-
Comment on US solar will pass wind in 2025 and leave coal in the dust soon after in ~enviro
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentI thought it was a fart jokeI thought it was a fart joke
-
Comment on EA is reportedly about to be sold in a record-setting $50 billion buyout to an investor group that includes private equity and Saudi Arabia in ~games
PuddleOfKittens Link ParentIt doesn't really matter whether genAI reduces costs or not. If it does, and there are lots of buyers willing to pay $70 with low expectations, then someone else will come along and do so. Because...It doesn't really matter whether genAI reduces costs or not. If it does, and there are lots of buyers willing to pay $70 with low expectations, then someone else will come along and do so. Because EA doesn't own the genAI.
The reality is that AAA devs primarily avoid competing with indie devs by being too expensive to copy. If genAI makes AAA graphics cheaper, they're permitting more competition with EA and thus lowering profits, not boosting them.
And note that all of this is after "if genAI can".
-
Comment on Donald Trump suggests using ‘dangerous’ US cities as ‘training grounds’ for military in ~society
PuddleOfKittens LinkOoh let's put untrained troops with guns into cities full of innocent people, what's the worst that could happen?Ooh let's put untrained troops with guns into cities full of innocent people, what's the worst that could happen?
It's definitely a whimsical comparison. It feels appropriate given how people talk about how much AI reduces costs, though.