This is just fearmongering. Oh no the sneaky Chinese cars are mapping our potholes…

Okay so NATO waits until a NATO member or members start something, then they join?

Didn’t they start wars in Iraq and Libya too?

Hopefully NATO isn’t stupid enough to take on anyone either

Did this leak happen before or after NYT published an investigation detailing how Israeli forces were raping and torturing defenseless Palestinian detainees brought in from the Gaza Strip?

I bet an AI could do it

Bah, the data is on their websites, figure out how to collect it.

Why is there not an app that tells you which grocery stores have the best prices? I should be able to give it a list and it’ll tell me where to buy each item.

Kiwi farms?

It’s like we’re going back to the pre-internet era but it’s obviously a little different. Before the internet, there were just a few major media providers on TV plus lots of local newspapers. I would say that, for the most part in the USA, the public trusted TV news sources even though their material interests weren’t aligned (regular people vs big media corporations). It felt like there wasn’t a reason not to trust them, since they always told an acceptable version of the truth and there wasn’t an easy way to find a different narrative (no internet or crazy cable news). Local newspapers were usually very trusted, since they were often locally owned and part of the community.

The internet broke all of those business models. Local newspapers died because why do you need a paper when there are news websites? Major media companies were big enough to weather the storm and could buy up struggling competitors. They consolidated and one in particular started aggressively spinning the news to fit a narrative for ratings and political gain of the ownership class. Other companies followed suit.

This, paired with the thousands of available narratives online, weakened the credibility of the major media companies. Anyone could find the other side of the story or fact check whatever was on TV.

Now what is happening? The internet is being polluted with garbage and lies. It hasn’t been good for some time now. Obviously anyone could type up bullshit, but for a minute photos were considered reliable proof (usually). Then photoshopping something became easier and easier, which made videos the new standard of reliable proof (in most cases).

But if anything can be fake now and difficult to identify as fake, then how can you fact check anything? Only those with the means will be able to produce undeniably real news with great difficulty, which I think will return power to major news companies or something equivalent.

I’m probably wrong about what the future holds, so what do you think is going to happen?

Yeah what happened to that one out of South Korea?

It’s just a ship dropping out of warp a safe distance from our system. While inconvenient, it’s considered best practice to drop out well away from the system’s center to shed the particles you’ve accumulated in your warp bubble during transit. They are extremely energetic and can cause immense damage if released irresponsibly close to an inhabited planet. This is especially true when visiting a primitive world that hasn’t set up any sensible warp safety systems.

Inflation was caused by a combination of supply chain disruptions (mostly this) and corporate profiteering (less this). It had little to nothing to do with government actions. Read some nonpartisan literature on the topic before you come back.

Wow what an excellent retort, I must now go back and reconsider my entire belief system and everything I’ve ever learned /s. But on a more serious note, money does practically grow on trees when viewed from the government’s perspective.

Even if the USA was to start a massive federal level HSR program tomorrow, it would likely be several disconnected networks which may never connect across the Rockies.

So what? You gotta start somewhere

The “it’s not economical” argument is used very often for numerous topics and it always begs the question: not economical compared to what? Is the purportedly more economical choice accounting for every externality it creates? Is it only economical because it already exists? Are there reasons we should stop doing the economical option? Lastly, what unaccounted for benefits might materialize if the uneconomical choice was pursued anyway?

So in this particular situation, we’re comparing the costs of building and operating high speed rail lines in the US to maintaining highways, hundreds of thousands of vehicles, airports, and planes. We should also account for the externalities created by using this infrastructure, so a shitload of carbon emissions plus the negatives of car culture and flying is just an awful experience.

We should also consider what may happen if high speed rail was built anyway. I bet there would be so much more medium distance travel, people would be going on day trips to cities they wouldn’t have considered before. Previously unknown and forgotten areas of the country may be revitalized. Who knows what cool stuff could happen.

Anyway, it really sucks when people use the “iT,s nOt eCoNoMiCaL” argument because it’s probably not true when everything is taken into account.

Yo better check your fuel prices: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2023/09/21/why-uranium-prices-are-soaring

Plus imagine how expensive uranium will get once we start relying on nuclear. It’ll be the new oil.