A fantastic summary.
Addendum to #2: to add insult to injury, a lot of the training data in AI models was used without consent. That means that the output of skilled people was stolen from them in order to train systems designed to steal from them again.
There are simply a lot fewer people on Lemmy. That's to be expected.
I will say that the quality of conversation tends to be a bit higher on Lemmy. YMMV though.
I feel a lot less of the hive-mind effect on Lemmy versus Reddit. Not sure why that is.
Aside from scientific research (which can be mostly or entirely done remotely by machines), there is exceedingly little reason to inhabit Mars, or any other planet for that matter.
There are sociopolitical implications of extraterrestrial missions (think: space race), but in terms of human habitation at scale, what would be the point? In science fiction, there is usually a major impetus: the earth is dying, the earth was stolen by aliens, etc etc. In these cases, though, the fiction part handles most of the stuff that would be hardest in real life.
From a practical standpoint, anything that can be done on Mars can be done for mere fractions of the resources here on Earth. At some point, it just comes down to the economics. Even if there were major issues with pollution or resources shifting the planet towards uninhabitability, fixing or mitigating those problems is likely to use orders of magnitude fewer resources than going to Mars. If such problems were beyond fixing, it wouldn't mean Mars gets cheaper. It would mean humans go extinct.
Now, there are charlatans who will say we absolutely need to inhabit Mars and will give you a barrage of tenuous reasons. Musk comes to mind. Usually this is done to drive investment in companies or technologies which have been nudged into seeming Mars-adjacent, but at the end of the day, they're just raising funds for regular rich people stuff here on Earth.
That's funny because I'm not coming to PlayStation.
I guess they just sell less then.
I would have said start betting like Biff Tannen, but that probably will end up changing the timeline "too much".
But if I can't die and am immune to disease, I guess I exploit that. Can't drown so I'll hop in an ocean and go somewhere. No need for food or lodging. I'll just wander for the next 100 years and peoplewatch.
resist the urge to be a finger-wagging douche about it.
No need for personal attacks, but it does mean I generally won't be responding to your "points".
Save for one observation: it's strange to be upset at and fixate on some generalized boogeymen being "condescending" given the scope of what has happened due to MAGA gaining power. One is some people potentially being rude, while the other is a shared suffering (in some cases losses of careers, losses of savings, even some deaths) because of the poor decisionmaking of a voting bloc.
Point that anger in the right direction. Yes, I'm glad some of those voters are turning around. Still waiting on a tangible result.
This has got to be the answer.
Also, it's just kind of a vibe having everyone be sort of outside. It would feel different in a studio kitchen.
They were lied to - and then chose to ignore their fellow citizens telling them that for years. They chose to ignore those signs for years. We didn't give Germany a pass for Hitler because enough folks after the war said they finally saw the light; instead, we proceeded with a plan of denazification.
There are a lot of factors at play, not the least of which being critical thinking and education. I don't think it's accurate to say there is now broad scale agreement on these issues because a bunch of Trumpers are just now, 2 terms in, realizing that they were duped.
I still have trouble giving a pass for the whole 3-time Trump voter thing. More than half the country is smarter than this, because half didn't vote Trump at all, and some percentage of Trump voters didn't vote for him multiple times.
I get it, credit where it's due and all that. I'm glad he came to his senses, but we don't have to pretend he's a genius for it.
To look at this another way: the government of South Korea has decided to give people the feeling of a strike without actually letting it affect bottom lines in any meaningful way. That is, they have relegated the strike (a key utility of those fighting for workers' rights) to being a tool used solely to assuage discontent in the short term. Without economic teeth, it cannot be used to enhance the lives of workers, which is ultimately the explicit goal of any strike.
South Korea is of course not alone in reducing or eliminating the rights of its citizens so that corporations continue to profit at their expense.