There’s no positive end game in it for him.

If he turns this into a “Look at what you made me do!”-moment, he will have nothing but enemies and they’ll all know that nothing will ever please him, which is dangerous for them.

Thus, their only option will be to assassinate him shortly after. Either by Iran getting back at him with a dirty bomb, or the Saudis getting pissed about the oil prices dropping and making a Diana out of him, or even by some lunatic MAGA who “didn’t vote for this”.

Literally everyone would be out to take him out, and he has nothing to gain from it.

If he realizes this, then no.

His best option is to chicken out. He will claim to have reached a tremendous deal with Pakistan that stopped him from bombing Iran out of his own kindness and generosity, and he will mispronounce all the words.

Also, it is capital now. It would make so much sense to make more capital by waiting, preserving and investing, but that’s not what capitalism does, only oil, money, now.

If religion is really what stops these people, then religion is covering for mental illness that ought to be addressed instead of hidden away in churches.

Most American cities use a distance or block system.

Most European cities use the odd/even system. Each plot increase by two on either side, so one side of the road has 1,3,5… and the other has 2,4,6…

If a plot is later subdivided or more houses are built on a plot, its new addresses will get post-fixed letters a,b,c,d…

No doubt. But why does the farmer get the money? It would make more sense for the government to buy the land back for good.

That’s a nice idea, but it would be better if the farmers hadn’t bought that strip of field to begin with.

Farming is ridiculous like that.

Now the farmers are getting paid your tax euros because they once bought it, destroyed it and took no responsibility for it.

For people to demand anything you’ll need a democracy. For people to want universal healthcare they need to understand that socializing the health cost is a benefit for the population.

Add the words together and you get social democracy.

In most countries this is what lead to universal healthcare. In most countries the social democracy parties were founded by labour unions.

Despite USA being first with labour unions, they never really succeeded, because they were violently struck down early on.

Anyway, it’s that simple: Join a union, let the union establish a political party, let the party make universal healthcare. I know that seems very uphill, but it doesn’t actually have to take centuries to do.

When the first unions were formed in Europe, the workers also expected it to be a multigenerational battle, and yet decided to try it in the vague hope that it might eventually benefit their grandchildren. However they were so successful that they achieved the goal within their own lifetime.

… because they did have it?

It wasn’t universal at the time, covering only the poorest workers, but Germany was the first country to establish a social health care system in 1883. It didn’t work very well during the war, but it was technically still there. Since the war, they gradually expanded it achieving universal coverage sometime in the 1980s.

Tax dollars at work.

You actually think that because USA spends the most money on military that they’d have the most valuable military? I’m sorry to inform you that perhaps the military is in the same shape as your health care, which is also the most expensive in the world.

Grifting is a hell of a politic to count on when you actually need the stuff that you’ve already paid for.

Trying to censor kids shows isn’t feasible. They’re going to find out anyway, or it will be a massive culture shock when they eventually hear their first swear word as adults. I’d rather take the opportunity to talk with my kids about it if they watch crap.

SpongeBob doesn’t really bother me, but if they watch Alvin and the Chipmunks I always ask them to use headphones, because I can’t stand that shit.

but can’t afford one

It’s worthwhile to run all the figures through a spreadsheet.

I borrowed money to get one. The savings justify the interest. Mine will break even this year after 5 years. After that, it’s pure savings, so I really couldn’t afford not to.

Maybe it’s time to cut ties.

Let the CEO do his business with AI only. Let the developers do their own business without a CEO and without AI.

If I can predict it, I’ll skip to the last step and just not attempt to do it.

This works because the person who is supposed to remind me of the task has a to-do list that takes about two years to go through. By the time she gets to reminding me it’s already irrelevant.

Humour was very different when they first started. There was a turning point in the late 90s with Mandrilaftalen and stand-up in general.

Everything prior to that was just boomer humour with repeated punchlines.

I also can’t believe Tim & Gordon still have status as funny TV celebrities. They had one show 30 years ago where they told the same fucking jokes in every single episode.

But at least they weren’t as bad as Ørkenens Sønner. Even at the time they aired on TV, you would be able to find their entire joke catalogue on the joke page in the magazines that old ladies read at the hairdresser.

Plumbing is fairly safe from any kind of automation and also well paid.

They do use robots for pipe inspection and minor repairs, but that’s about the extend of what the clankers will ever be able to do.

Aready is. Their strategy is longer than four years so it just doesn’t seem so obvious, but they’re slowly and steadily gaining more control of the globe than any other country.

the CEO has said that managers need to prove that AI can’t do a job if they want to increase headcount

This is why it will fail. Instead of the CEO providing any kind of explanation for how AI could work, managers now need to waste their time arguing with the CEO why their stupid ideas won’t work.

I have one manager who does this kind of reverse burden of proof all the time (unrelated to AI), and in the meantime we don’t get anything done of value of to the company.

It’s like trying to push a door that says pull.

This right here:

The effectiveness of boycotts relies on a mass demonstration of refusal, and that massive movement doesn’t currently exist."

This is the problem.

If one dumb ass CEO decides to destroy the environment, it requires millions of people to know about it and act upon it, just to make a dent in the quarterly income statement that might make the one CEO consider other options.

We don’t actually have a choice as consumers.

We can vote for more regulation of companies, but politics only work locally, while pollution works globally. We’ll basically need a world wide political concesus just to stop one single idiot from destroying the globe.

The guillotine might be a brutal and unpleasant vigilant idea, but it sure as hell is faster, cheaper and causes fewer casualties than any other way.

His personal Vietnam.

You’re right. I agree, but also have to believe that we can make a way out of it.

I initially wrote a long rant but regretted, because I think the two of us could spend all night long writing back and forth and I need to sleep more than arguing in agreement online.

Remind me: I’ll buy you a drink if we’re still alive in 5 years.