Reject modernity, embrace nomadic life in the forests.

It doesn’t matter. If the FSB knocks on their door and says “add this extra code to your builds or you’ll disappear into the basement of the Lubyanka”, what do you think they’ll say?

For those who tried it, how good is the Calc (Excel equivalent) and Impress (PowerPoint equivalent)?

They have two products:

* Subscription plans, which are (probably) subsidized and definitely oversubscribed (ie, 100% of subscribers could not use 100% of their tokens 100% of the time).

* Wholesale tokens, which are (probably) profitable.

If you try to use one product as the other product, it breaks their assumptions and business model.

I don't really see how this is weaponized malaise; capacity planning and some form of over-subscription is a widely accepted thing in every industry and product in the universe?

I acknowledge that the 20th century was marked by much bloodshed, but this wasn't limited to the world wars and it continues violently into the 21st century.

If the world is governed by rules, why does the United States maintain a considerable number of military bases around the world, far exceeding the total number of military bases of all other countries combined?

Why is the American military budget so much higher than the combined military budgets of all other countries?

I don't understand: if there is a shortage of doctors, why are we trying to solve that by training AI models modelled on influencers that spits out (hopefully improving) advice at 10x the rate of a human doctor? Is it impossible for highly advanced societies like ours to pay more for people to get trained as doctors, nurses or whatever is missing? Or to convince them to choose a profession that deals with other humans instead of UBI?

I don't think people are afraid of doctors using imperfect tools. That is the easier part. But that will not solve the problem of too many patients for a single doctor and what leads to the lack of empathy. This was a problem even before AI. It seems society does not have empathy for these kind of "professional problems". Offering tools instead of humans is an even riskier approach, not for that particular individual, but for how society tends to build trust and empathy. We tend to see everything now as a problem with a technical solution because we only have confidence in solving technical problems.

Unlikely. EU countries are consistently restrictive about access to this kind of data. Even when it is available, it often has odd restrictive licensing. This is an area where the US, with its liberal data access policies, is far ahead of Europe.

Something else to keep in mind is that the data products are extremely large. It would be expensive to give the public access. I used to host these types of data sets for EU countries. The workload just from authorized users is resource intensive, it doesn't scale cheaply. (I once woke up to find a metaphorical smoking crater where my server racks were because an authorized user shared his credentials with a few friends overnight.)

I will avoid getting into a “who understands economics better” debate.

But factory workers usually require specialized machinery, tooling, and physical capacity, which makes overhiring slower, harder and more constrained. Those investments force more deliberate planning.

By contrast, engineers mostly require a laptop and company hoodie... That low marginal cost makes it far easier to hire aggressively on expectations and unwind just as aggressively when those expectations change.

>I'd go so far to say this is probably the case for most people. Your average person is in really poor fitness-shape but just fine health-shape.

Modern medicine has failed to move into the era of subtlety and small problems and many people suffer as a result. Fitness nerds and general non-scientists fill the gap poorly so we get a ton of guessing and anecdotal evidence and likely a whole lot of bad advice.

Doctors won't say there's a problem until you're SICK and usually pretty late in the process when there's not a lot of room to make improvements.

At the same time, doctors won't do anything if you're 5% off optimal, but they'll happily give you a medicine that improves one symptom that's 50% off optimal that comes along with 10 side effects. Although unless you're dying or have something really straightforward wrong with you, doctors don't do much at all besides giving you a sedative and or a stimulant.

Doctors don't know what to do with small problems because they're barely studied and the people who DO try to do something don't do it scientifically.