The post is saying it’s difficult to discover lemmy without someone telling you about it. It’s not really about searching lemmy.

The headline focuses on the wrong thing. Making a bunch of crappy songs and uploading the to Spotify and other streaming services is perfectly legal, AI or not.

The illegal part is that he created lots and lots of fake accounts that constantly streamed his songs and masked them to look like authentic listens. So much so that he was making $110k per month. That is straight-up fraud, which is what he was arrested for.

It has nothing to do with AI, but that makes more people click on the article.

They don’t ban your account, they ban your switch. If your switch is caught, it won’t be able to use any Nintendo services ever again. But your account would still work on other devices.

Good ol’ subscribers. If you can’t grow 'em, squeeze 'em.

“We’ll have no tax on billion dollar corporations and pay for it by taking away the votes of childless ‘people’ and selling them to the rich!” - Tired Trump and Couch-Fucker Vance

IANA economist, but I’d kinda expect prices to just go up $25k in popular areas. However, the US is really big and has A LOT of places that are less in demand and have cheap housing. Like, many entire states. And even popular states can get cheap if you just go a little away from population centers. I wouldn’t be surprised if those places don’t see a $25k increase.

And for a free trial, no less! If this isn’t laughed out of the courtroom and dismissed with prejudice, we’re all screwed.

What about mouthwash?

I agree, 401ks are stupid and were invented as more of a tax loophole for the wealthy than as an every-man’s retirement fund. But they’re cheaper for business so that’s what we’re stuck with.

That’s not what I was talking about at all, though. I was just pointing out that if you have enough money to save for retirement, there are ways to relatively easily invest and grow your money while still mitigating risk and staying mostly hands-off.

Fun fact about pensions. At their height, only about 45% of private-sector workers actually had a pension. Having one was undoubtedly better, on average, than having a 401k today. But they weren’t the utopian retirement solution that we (including myself) like to pretend they were. A majority of the population didn’t benefit from them at all, and the less-fortunate were essentially in the same or worse spot as they’re in today.

There are targeted retirement funds that target a retirement year and slowly transition from stocks into bonds/less risky positions as that date approaches. Those are generally a better idea for retirement savings than broader market funds for the reason you described.

And it’s not like retirement immediately liquidates your 401k. There’s just some minimum that you need to take out per year which isn’t very high. Roth IRA’s don’t have a minimum distrust requirement until after the death of the owner.

Thing is, it already was ubiquitous before the AI “boom”. That’s why everything got an AI label added so quickly, because everything was already using machine learning! LLMs are new, but they’re just one form of AI and tbh they don’t do 90% of the stuff they’re marketed as and most things would be better off without them.

deleted by creator

I think once upon a time, some dumb politician used it to announce something dumb and it didn’t work lol

Who has this many friends willing to jump into a creek fully unclothed?

So they’re adopting a similar structure to OpenAI, a for-profit company majority controlled by a non-profit organization.

Needs based support is definitely a good thing, but that’s not what SS is. That’s closer to welfare and would require a much deeper look into people’s financial situation than a retirement program like SS.

I could make $500k/yr while working then experience some disaster/disability that takes it all away. Conversely, I could be homeless then suddenly come into massive wealth later in my life. Or, I could live a lavish life because my parents/SO are extremely wealthy, yet I am dirt poor on paper. SS is not designed for these situations, and attempting to modify it to fit them is probably a worse idea than bolstering other entitlement programs that are designed to fill in the gaps.

Wouldn’t removing the cap just delay the issue? You get more out of SS the more you put in. The cap exists because there is a maximum amount you can get out of SS. If they remove the input cap, then that implies they’d remove the output cap too. In which case, the immediate result is a lot more money flowing into SS, but over time, a whole lot more money will start flowing out, too.

Outrage, yes, but what about decreased usage? What’s the effect on revenue and stock price? C-suite pay?

The interesting question is what happens if Valve is still around after all of us are long gone and there are millions of 150+ year old accounts, many under active use?

R6S has been a pay-to-win mess after the first few “seasons”. What’s the difference between a subscription service and regular releases of “optional” $30 dlc that gives you new characters, and thus an edge over the competition?

R6S players will cope by saying characters are balanced and, if you’re good, you can win with just the basic free characters. The fact is, more characters lets you adapt to, and more effectively counter, more maps, play styles, opposing characters, metas, etc…

Yes, you can unlock the characters for free, but there are dozens of them and each one takes a ridiculous number of hours to unlock, during which you’re playing at a disadvantage. It’s pretty much impossible for anyone other than dedicated school-aged kids to unlock all of the characters for free.

All of this, and the game still costs money to buy!!! Complete scam.