• Mr_Blott@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Air fryers are only popular because Americans have been using microwaves to cook for decades, which are possibly the worst cooking devices ever created.

    If they had decent fan ovens during that time, they wouldn’t be anywhere near as popular

    Conversely, air fryers are seen to be popular in the UK, because nobody will admit they fell for the advertising, and now only use them for chips

    • Nfamwap@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not just chips my friend. Pies, sausages, chicken, salmon. Half the cooking time or an oven, better results and a fraction of the energy use.

      The hype is real.

      • Wahots@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This. It’s great for steaks or cuts of chicken, even sandwich melts, but it uses less power and is faster than the oven. I tend to use my air fryer for a lot of dinners instead of opting for a much larger oven. The cooking tends to be much more even too, I don’t have to worry about raw spots as much as I did with my oven.

    • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Nobody uses microwaves to do actual cooking, and it’s just a handy alternate heating method in your oven or toaster oven. Who cares?

  • KᑌᔕᕼIᗩ@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    What we’re currently calling AI isn’t AI but just a language processing system that takes its best guess at a response from it’s database of information they pilfered from the internet like a more sophisticated Google.

    It can’t really think for itself and it’s answers can be completely wrong. There’s nothing intelligent about it.

    • jeremyparker@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This whole open AI has Artificial General Intelligence but they’re keeping it secret! is like saying Microsoft had Chat GPT 20 years ago with Clippy.

      Humans don’t even know what intelligence is, the thing we invented to try to measure who’s got the best brains - we literally don’t even have scientific definition of the word, much less the ability to test it - so we definitely can’t program it. We are a veeeeerry long way from even understanding how thoughts and memories work; and the thing we’re calling “general intelligence” ? We have no fucking idea what that even means; there’s no way a bunch of computer scientists can feed enough Internet to a ML algorithm to “invent” it. (No shade, those peepos are smart - but understanding wtf intelligence is isn’t going to come from them.)

      One caveat tho: while I don’t think we’re close to AGI, I do think we’re very close to being able to fake it. Going from Chat GPT to something that we can pretend is actual AI is really just a matter of whether we, as humans, are willing to believe it.

  • Hundun@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    We learn and teach inferior personal computing practice, and most people don’t realize how much they are missing.

    The vast majority of people outside of enthusiast circles have absolutely no idea what a personal computer is, how it works, what is an operating system, what it does, and how it is supposed to be used. Instead of teaching about shells, sessions, environments, file systems, protocols, standards and Unix philosophy (things that actually make our digital world spin) we teach narrow systems of proprietary walled gardens.

    This makes powerful personal computing seem mysterious and intimidating to regular people, so they keep opting out of open infrastructures, preferring everything to come pre-made and pre-configured for them by an exploitative corporation. This lack of education is precisely what makes us so vulnerable to tech hype cycles, software and hardware obsolescence, or just plain shitty products that would have no right to exist in a better world.

    This blindness and apathy makes our computing more inaccessible and less sustainable, and it makes us crave things that don’t actually deserve our collective attention.

    And the most frustrating thing is: proper personal computing is actually not that hard, and it has never been more easy to get into, but no one cares, because getting milked for data is just too convenient for most adults.

    • anothermember@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Completely agree. Now my hot take for this thread:

      If governments some time in the 90s had decided from the start to ban computer hardware from being sold with pre-installed software then we wouldn’t have this problem. If everyone had to install their own operating system from scratch, which like you say isn’t hard if it’s taught, it would have killed the mystery around computing and people would feel ownership over their computers and computing.

  • Xavier@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Copyright should have stayed the original initial 14 years with possible renewal to 28 years. But like in France back then, also include the original authors (last one alive, if several) lifespan. Hence, a copyright would last either the authors lifespans or 28 years, whichever is longer.

    Moreover, the patent system is being abused and does not serve the original goal of “any useful art, manufacture, engine, machine, or device, or any improvement there on not before known or used.” It granted the applicant the “sole and exclusive right and liberty of making, constructing, using and vending to others to be used” of his invention.. It needs major changes, including the requirement to have the “invention” be under examination by reputable third-party laboratories (such as Intertek, SGI, Underwriters Laboratories, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Technischer Überwachungsverein, SGS - Société Générale de Surveillance, etc…) before being granted a patent. Nowadays, patents are given almost willy-nilly to anyone no matter how vague or obvious the supposed invention.

    Nowadays, patents are being misused in Patent Ambush mechanisms and scenarios, meanwhile Patent Trolls and Hoarders whole existence is are to impede/obstruct legally and impose exorbitant levies/fees onto organization and companies actually innovating and developing useful art/process/devices. Even more incredible, there are Submarine Patents being hidden away to suddenly take hostage existing products and process of various companies by imposing extortionate royalties.

  • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Pitbulls are not more genetically predisposed towards biting or mauling than other breeds and the supposed “statistical data” on the subject is based around a confluence of inaccurate metrics caused by 1) people not being very good at accurately identifying dog breeds, 2) existing groups that hate pitbulls pushing bad statistics for political purposes, and 3) a self-fulfilling prophecy of pitbulls having a bad reputation and actively being sought out by people who want vicious dogs and who will treat their dogs in such a way as to encourage that behavior. And I say all of this as someone who does not own a pitbull and probably never will.

    • Jenntron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I know a lot of it is from what people did. When I was a kid in the late 80s/early 90s, we lived in a town which had many illegal dog fighters in it. They mostly chose pitbulls but not solely. We ended up saving one puppy from them and he was some sort of mastiff mix.

      One of their pitbulls escaped once. I opened my door and it came running from out of nowhere, snatched my cat from beside me and shook her to death in front of me. It was so terrible.

      They would do the worst things to these dogs. They would beat them, use food against them and for a long time it was even really popular to feed them gun powder to make them more aggressive. They would condition their dogs in any way they could to make them good fighters and as aggressive as possible.

      Pitbulls have a lot of sharp teeth and sturdy, muscular bodies, so they never had a chance with these assholes.

      The dog breed I’ve personally seen get out of line as a pet and bite people the most is the German Shepard. That’s just my experience. Either way I believe that dogs are like people. They can have genetic tendencies but their environment will have the largest influence on them most of the time. I’ve never met an aggressive pitbull outside of those terrible dog fighter’s dogs.

    • nomecks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The problem is that terriers are very susceptible to Kushings disease, which can lead to very irratic behavior. That’s manageable when it’s a 20lb Boston Terrier, but horrifying when it’s a 60 lb terrier of any type.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Omg thank you! The old place, you would’ve been downvoted 200 times and gotten death threats for saying this.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pit bulls aren’t genetically predisposed to attacking things, but when they do attack things, they’re genetically predisposed to doing a lot more damage than most other breeds. Gameness is a thing.

    • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The meanest, most dangerous dog I knew was an american eskimo owned by my ex wife. This was a 20 pound fluffball, and he looked like he would be friendly and fun to scratch behind the ears.

      He loved to bite people, especially children. He had a specific thing he would do when someone looked at him: he would look up and smile, while vigorously wagging his poofy tail. You’d reach down to pet that brilliant white, angel-soft fur, and as soon as you were close enough, he would take a chunk out of your hand or arm. This wasn’t a playful bite, he would bite down hard and hang on.

  • UnfortunateDoorHinge@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Teachers should be paid 50% more. If you want good teachers to stay, you have to walk the walk, otherwise you’ll get a perpetual cycle of overwhelmed grads being bossed around by rusted-on bottom teer heads.

      • jeremyparker@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If I can interject - I don’t think the OP is showing an unpopular opinion. The people they’re talking to aren’t mad. It looks to me like an opinion whose wisdom isn’t generally accepted - and there’s a difference.

        Unpopular opinion: pedophilia is a mental disorder; child rape (including “statutory” rape) is an act of violence, cruelty, and power - or, in arguably the worst case, crimes of opportunity. Not all child rapists are pedophiles and not all pedophiles are child rapists. Pedophiles should be treated; child rapists should be imprisoned forever. (Those that are in the overlap can be treated in prison.)

        This opinion is (I think) probably true, but if you go around talking about it, you will be unpopular.

        Unaccepted opinion: well, there are a lot of them here, but this one - about teachers - could be tweaked into one: the only way we are going to see changes that would actually benefit our society and country, the things the news and politicians say are “luxury expenses” - aka health care, teachers’ salaries, rent and real estate regulation, etc - is with a general strike. The propaganda and gaslighting and victim blaming are so deeply entrenched that they have become the most profitable sectors of our economy.

        This opinion is - again, in my opinion - probably true, and there are a lot of people who agree - but not enough. If the crowd in that picture represents a country of 350 million, then that one person represents maybe 0.5-1 million people? Which is way more than the supporters of a general strike.

        Why did I say all that? Mostly because I’m bored - but I think it’s a neat distinction to make.

    • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I suppose all the people standing in front of you are record label executives then

      • dotslashme@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No of course not.

        I still pay for things I can actually own, however subscription services routinely change, limit or simple remove items that you supposedly bought.

  • Shanedino@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Religions are mostly just popularized conspiracy theories. Believing in God is about as realistic as believing the world is flat.

    • polysexualstick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      But it’s not about that for many people. For many people, being religious is more about finding strength and peace in that kind of guided spirituality

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The same thing can be said about most conspiracy theories. People want to believe in aliens because then we aren’t alone and they feel more comfortable, for example. The biggest issue I have is it leads them to do things that are un-helpful for the rest of humanity.

        • dgbbad@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          But c’mon… There ARE aliens. Just maybe not here necessarily. But somewhere, there are 100% aliens.

    • Catsrules@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Believing in God is about as realistic as believing the world is flat.

      That is a bad comparison IMO. We have piles and piles of hard evidence the Earth is round. Saying the Earth is flat is just factually incorrect at this point.

      But the existence of God. I would argue we have no hard evidence of God’s existence nor do we have hard evidence that God doesn’t exist. As far as science is concerned it is still a theory.

      On top of that what makes a god a God there are multiple definitions of a God. If simulation theory is correct and we are all just in a simulation would be people outside of the simulation be our Gods? Or if an extremely advanced civilization existed would they be Gods to us? Or If we as humans advanced enough could we become Gods our self.

  • frezik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The metric system should be redone in base 12, and RPN should be the norm for teaching arithmetic.