

Now that you mention it, I wouldn’t be surprised if Japanese companies manufacture more cars in the US than US-based companies.
Now that you mention it, I wouldn’t be surprised if Japanese companies manufacture more cars in the US than US-based companies.
Hard agree, as an American. Honda and Toyota destroy our local companies in pretty much every regard other than maybe regulation dodging.
I’d love to see insurance companies get taken down a notch, but what you’re saying isn’t nearly as simple as you think. People regularly get tens of thousands of dollars into debt for lifesaving care, even with insurance. Those without it can go hundreds of thousands or even millions in the hole - I’ve personally known people in that situation. I certainly agree that hospitals are partly to blame, but the whole healthcare system is built around insurance paying most of the cost. This never would have happened if insurance didn’t exist. It’s a captive market. The only way doctors, hospitals, and pharmacists would unite in not accepting insurance was if all insurance companies disappeared. There’s just too much money on the table otherwise.
Very true. There’s some benefit where the business can get a “package deal” of sorts which makes it cheaper than buying individual policies, but it’s still a shell game.
Insurance companies make money by indirectly extorting customers, be they individuals or businesses, through pricing schemes with healthcare providers. The American healthcare system is designed and priced around people having insurance, as you’ve noticed. This leads to insanely high bills for what should be simple things. An ambulance ride often costs over $1,000 without insurance, for example. In a nutshell, they’ve created a system where they are both the problem and the solution. Why don’t they start behaving more ethically? Well, from a money standpoint, why would you become less corrupt when you can collect more money by being corrupt?
Changing insurance providers, or even just certain coverage choices, isn’t easy. We have what are called “enrollment periods” in the US when you can do this, and the only other times are under major life changes such as marriage or having a child. As another user noted, most people get insurance through their employer. The company (usually) pays the lion’s share of the premiums; otherwise, the plans would be completely out of reach to employees. My plan would be four times as expensive to me if I was paying for it out of pocket.
As a result, starting something like what you want on a national level would be extraordinarily expensive, hard to compete with established players, and likely legally troublesome. Don’t get me wrong, we need reform pretty badly, but those reasons are why it hasn’t really taken off.
I have several mental disorders that partially disable me, making daily life difficult. I can function, but I’m still at a considerable disadvantage compared to everyone else. One in particular is associated with a 20+ year reduction in life expectancy and drastically higher risk of dementia later in life.
Talking like that could get you arrested, your friends and family detained, and your online communities shut down. Don’t do that to the people you care about.
Don’t take non-OTC drugs without consulting a physician first. You could really screw yourself up with some of them, the hard stuff especially. The potential ups of doing them aren’t worth the likely losses.
People who take aspirin or ibuprofen take it for a specific purpose, and when they no longer need it, they stop. With things like steroids, heroin, cocaine, and Adderall (if they don’t have specific conditions like ADHD), people frequently end up chasing a horizon that only gets further away the harder they run to catch it. It’s a miserable existence and it causes them, and often their friends and loved ones, endless pain.
You deserve the best from yourself. That includes self-care. You’re more than your flaws and disorders, whatever they may be. Don’t make those an excuse to wreck yourself in pursuit of a goal that probably isn’t real.
The majority of my friends are online. The internet has connected me with people who broaden my horizons, help me learn interesting and important things, and grow as a person. You don’t need to know someone in-person for that to happen anymore. IRL friendships will always be better, all other things being equal, but they’re not the only solution.
One author did this, but as a rebuttal to several 1-star reviews claiming he lied in the book. He made it a 1 star review so it would show up on the same page as the people he was arguing against.
To be fair, the sidebar says this is for open-ended and thought-provoking questions. But I can see this place becoming Debate Bro Central if the mods don’t add a rule like “Don’t ask a question if you just want to argue with people over it.”
Saint Benedict Joseph Labre followed a similar path. Though he was from a wealthy family, he strove to live a monastic life. When he was turned down twice, he resorted to becoming a homeless pilgrim who traveled between European holy sites until he died of starvation. Notably, though, he was said to avoid people who were too fond of him and practically sought out opportunities to be downtrodden.
Capitalism isn’t the problem. Any economy run by human beings is going to have cronyism.
My point is that the described scenario - “all money not absolutely required for existence is in the hands of the bourgeoisie” - hasn’t happened under free market systems as often as it has in communist/“state capitalist” countries like the Soviet Union.
I’m sorry I got you mixed up with the other person. But I find it interesting they haven’t answered that question yet.
That sounds an awful lot like an authoritarian state seizing control of the economy (for example, the Soviet Union). That most certainly didn’t happen through free market forces.
And I notice you still haven’t answered my question. Why is that? I think it would be pretty simple to answer, wouldn’t it? (Edit: got the wrong username)
We’re competing for people’s cash. If we do a good job at getting it, we get more of it. But how do you define “win”?
Also, please answer my question. If there is no competition, then how do you have anything other than a monopoly?
Preface: If all you want is to get a simple script/program going that will more or less work for your purposes, then I understand using AI to make it. But doing much more than this with it will not help you.
If you want to actually learn to code, then using AI to write code for you is a crutch. It’s like trying to learn how to write an essay by having ChatGPT write the essays for you. If you want to use an API in your code, then you’re setting yourself up for greater failure the more you depend on AI.
Case in point: if you want to make a module or script for Foundry VTT, then they explicitly tell you not to use AI, partly because the models available online have outdated information. In fact, training AI on their documentation is explicitly against the terms of service.
Even if you do this and avoid losing your license, you run a significant risk of getting unusable code because the AI hallucinated a function or method that doesn’t actually exist. You will likely wind up spending more time scouting the documents for what you actually want to do than if you’d just done it yourself to begin with.
And if the code works perfectly now, there’s no guarantee that it will work forever, or even in the medium term. The software and API receive updates regularly. If you don’t know how to read the docs and write the code you need, you’re screwed when something inevitably gets deprecated and removed. The more you depend on AI to write it for you, the less capable you’ll be of debugging it down the line.
This begs the question: why would you do any of this if you wanted to make something using an API?
If we don’t have competition, how will that be anything other than monopoly?
If an OSS project wants to thrive, it would behoove them to implement things that people want. I don’t think there’s a one-size-fits-all solution there, but they shouldn’t be surprised if nobody wants to use their software because it doesn’t do what they want.