blazera

I been promoting this shit for a while now. Energy storage can be surprisingly low tech, it just needs to be built

The profit margins for selling a game are pretty high when you dont have to make the game.

“We believe Artificial Intelligence can save lives – if we let it. Medicine, among many other fields, is in the stone age compared to what we can achieve with joined human and machine intelligence working on new cures."

Yeah probably. Theres lots of objective parameters you can give a medical model, and objective goals to train it towards.

EV battery production as it is currently practiced is terrible

Nah. Fossil fuel industry want people to think it is, and most people assume it is thinking there has to be a catch. Lithium “mining” is pretty low impact compared to traditional metal mining, and theres not that much lithium per battery anyway.

it’s actually a pretty simple to figure out carbon footprint for gas powered cars. Gasoline is just a bunch of carbon atoms loosely linked together. You add heat, you add oxygen, and the carbon molecule bonds break in favor of bonding with oxygen to form carbon dioxide/monoxide, and release energy in the process. That’s how combustion works. None of the carbon is destroyed in the process, all of the gasoline just gets converted into a gas; a greenhouse gas. Its why cars are the largest source of emissions in the US.

All of that is cut in an EV. With renewable energy sources there doesnt have to be any greenhouse emissions with EV’s.

Its a very messy game. I dont think there was ever a vision for what kind of game this was going to be, they just grabbed whatever was hype at the time and added it in. Throw in pokemon, throw in fortnite, throw in breath of the wild, throw in meme postable character creator. I guess its working out for em.

Biden giving weapons to israel:^

Biden giving weapons to Ukraine: uwu the republicans wont let me

I do get paid for my work and am well aware of what my work is worth. Not what I’d like for it to be worth, but the reality of people spending money on what I make.

"unless you want to take the world back into caves.”

ironically a likely scenario with runaway climate change overworking above ground air conditioning.

Aint shit been stolen. it’s willingly given. Spotify doesnt have to buy their music, they dont have to let spotify use their music. They paid for it this year, they’re letting artists know ahead of time, hey we’re not paying that price next year. And there is zero obligation for the artists to continue letting spotify use their music next year.

so take your music off of spotify, no one is making you give them your music.

Im an artist trying to make a living with my art. Its not like a normal job where youre profitable from the beginning. Shit is competitive, people dont want to spend money on stuff they can get for free, unless its really good. A thousand free views doesnt amount to a dime for anyone. I can and do outright sell some art, but its taken like hundreds of thousands of free views before i was good enough where anyone would give me money for it. You could also compare like patreon subscribers to twitter followers, it is a huge ratio, way more than 1000:1. You can sell your art, you can go a subscriber model, you can be hired for your art, there are plenty of avenues to profit from your art, but the bottom line is people have to willingly pay money for it.

you dont have to let them monetize anything. host it yourself, or sell your music on other sites.

It’s sort of a sliding scale between: making content that is popular enough for a platform to make considerable revenue from it and wants to pay you a portion to keep you there, because your content is competitive and could be making other platforms money. Or, it’s a free hosting site for data you’re uploading that’s funded with ads. Every other platform I know with this model, like Youtube or Twitch, have a cutoff between the two, it’s a hosting site for users until they’re popular enough to become business partners with a monetary agreement. It’s two way freedom between each party, spotify doesnt have to pay anyone anything, and no one has to host their content on spotify.

This isnt a retroactive change of terms, it’s new terms starting next year. Everyone’s getting what was agreed to this year. If they dont support the new terms, they can leave the platform. They wont, because they’re using it as a free hosting platform and not a money maker, maybe with hopes they’ll be popular enough someday.

the product isnt being taken and needing replacing, this is like people coming to look at the soap you made. And if enough people come and look at it, an advertiser might give you some money to put an ad by the soap.

Now, there’s nothing stopping you from selling the soap instead. There are avenues to sell your music instead of having it on a freely accessable platform.

Like, i dont think i deserve any money for getting some thousands of views of my art. I think im getting paid about how much money im making the platforms its on, which is nothing. Im not yet good enough to get a job making art, or to sell my art instead of making it freely viewable.

Thats just it, number of hits is the metric for that, if its low then folks dont want to listen to it.

With hits that low, youre basically just advocating for UBI at that point, you cant expect pay for every little amateur hobby folks have.

If you want to do the maths, the maximum one can possibly earn in Spotify royalties is $0.003 a stream. It doesn’t add up to a living wage for most artists.

And now, to make matters far worse, starting in 2024 Spotify will stop paying anything at all for roughly two-thirds of tracks on the platform. That is any track receiving fewer than 1,000 streams over the period of a year.

So if my maths are right, this means people not getting paid…are people that would make less than 3 dollars in a whole year?

Ducktales Treasure of the Lost Lamp. And man its got powerful nostalgia, i had completely forgotten about it but rewatching it 30 years later i remembered all the dialogue.