You must log in or register to comment.
SPAM. Not the food variety, but the other. Inventend by a lawyer.
Not the 21st century
OK, you got me there. For me, EMail-SPAM is still a new thing, because I still remember the time before.
Lol… I remember the time before my friend…
I’ve been employed in the technology industry for the last 27 years though and it definitely started before Y2K.
Well, I was not that far off. ‘Spamford’ Wallace founded “Cyber Promotions” on 1997. While there have been unsolicided emails even way before that, they had not been an issue: Whoever did them got a clue-by-four from the network community and that’s it. SPAM started to be a problem with ‘Spamford’ Wallace.
Plastic and PFAS
20th century for those
Emissions controller modifiers designed to “roll coal”
It should be legal to slash the tires of anyone who does this.
Just remove their stem valve cores lol
Social Media. Cancerous all of it. Psyops and psychological manipulation. If you studied psychology and sociology you would know there is a huge stage 4 cancer in society and it is social media.
Post-WWII put propaganda/advertising to the next level. Social media turned that to 11.
Does Lemmy count as social media?
Yes - by most definitions. It’s powered by user-generated content and is based on interaction between users through engagement with that content, which is voted and scored.
There is a difference which I personally feel makes reddit less harmful than other social media, however, which is the algorithm - or lack of it.
In most social media, the algorithm exists to continually serve people the exact content they engage with in a constant feed, which is IMO the most socially damaging part of social media because it creates endless doomscrolling, toxic echo chambers, promotion of sponsored contebt and a whole raft of psychological problems in users.
The Lemmy homefeed is more organic, and scrolling through ‘all’ you see content genuinely from everywhere, in a less curated way based on upvotes, not individual algorithmic tailoring. And that’s maybe not as “engaging” but it’s far less damaging.
I also second social media, but I need to make another suggestion it’d be Keurigs k-cups. So much plastic waste for the barest level of convenience.
I love my Keurig, but I always use the reusable mesh cups.
K-cups are recyclable. Why are you people not putting them in the recycling.
To be used in most recycling programs you would need to fully remove the foil lid, and rinse out every k-cup before depositing them in recycling.
…okay. And? That’s like 2 seconds of work.
A lot of stuff marked as recyclable is technically recyclable but cost prohibitive to do so. I don’t know what type of plastic these cups are, but when they claim recyclable, it should specify percent actually being recycled.
I’m liking aldi at the moment. They list all the separate parts of packaging for me and how it can be disposed. I hope its just a step to moving more to biodegradable rather than recyclable.
They’re 100% recyclable. It’s also very cheap.
Again, possible to recycle does not mean they are actually recycled or economic to recycle. Many things are possible to recycle. Most are not. If their form factor or material makes them costly to recycle, they wont be. You say they are cheap. What cost to make new? What cost to collect, sort and recycle?
100% biodegradable would be better. With no plastic.
Keurigs are actually pretty convenient when you’re only making one cup. The trick is to get one of the reusable filters and just use whatever coffee you like.
Even the creator of the K-cup said he regretted creating it because of the environmental impact.
Was that before or after going to the bank, laughing?
Actually, the inventor of the Keurig coffee pod system, John Sylvan, sold his ownership of the product for $50,000 in 1997. 7 years after founding the company and before single-serve coffee really took off.
Interesting!
Yes, it’s a waste, but the whole thing was blown way the hell out of proportion.
I hike, kayak, canoe, whatever, all over the place. Every plastic bottle I pick up contains, what, 5 times the plastic? I pick up a LOT. And nobody thinks twice or raises a fuss.
We use a Keurig, but either with plastic refill cups or paper bags my wife brings home from the hotel.
Strong dissagree. I am barely functional pre-caffeine in the early morning. A Keurig is about as much mental energy as I can muster to operate. It is a godsend to me on day I work early.
I think the problem is not in pod-based single-serving coffee machines. Those are common, and well-loved for a reason.
But there are easily available alternatives that do the exact same thing without requiring so much plastic, namely Senseo coffee pads (they’re grounds in coffee filter paper) or CoffeeB and its compressed coffee grounds balls (so it’s all just coffee ground, both the coffee and the pod). Probably a fair few more I don’t know about personally.
Possibly even Nestle with their Nescafe pods. They’re aluminium but some countries achieve effectively 100% recycling on that, then the only issue is the filter membrane they place inside and I don’t know whether that is easily separated during recycling or not.
Thank you for beating me to mention this.
K-cups are really amazinlgy bad. And it’s not like there aren’t much better solutions available. Philips has those fully bio-degradable pads, a local store now sells a type of coffee maker that uses just the coffee powder in balls where the outer shell is compressed grounds that is cracked open to get to the powder inside.
But no, Keurig and their fucking oceans of plastic waste.
Nespresso has ones that are fully metal, and so can be shredded and separated by mass to get scrap aluminum and prime compost fodder. They accept them back by mail.
What the hell is a K-cup, it sounds like something you shove up your vaj
Nah that’s a diva cup
It’s a small plastic cup full of ground coffee, Kuerig machines use them. They generated a ton of plastic waste, since each k-cup was a single use.
There was great progress in compostable K-Cups from other vendors. And then Keurig did the DRM thing with the UV ink. So they literally made everything worse trying to keep their market reach.
I threw mine out and went back to a french press. Straight into compost, and the coffee tastes better.
And so is every Coke bottle with 5 times the plastic. And so is every store-bought coffee. Yet… silence. 🦗🦗🦗
What about bottles? Far more energy requires to melt and pour glass. No one says a word about single use.
Never found a K-cup on the beach or trail, but I pack plastic bags to haul trash and sometimes load 2 or 3.
Yet… silence.
Imagine never reading any news or discussions about environmental impact, but coming in here trying to defend Keurig by doing full whataboutism.
Plastic bottles weren’t invented in the 21st century
Don’t give anyone ideas.
Too late!
SUVs have to be high on the list.
20th century for those
They’re good if you need a vehicle that sits high and has a cargo capacity similar to a truck with a little more efficiency instead of torque.
need a vehicle that sits high
Why does anybody need a vehicle that “sits high”?
Because you need to handle terrain other than a clear road. When you live somewhere that regularly gets a foot of snow overnight then having a bit of extra ground clearance is a must for navigating that. You also want a bit of extra ground clearance if you need to go off road regularly. The last thing anyone wants is to be out in the boonies and crack their oil pan on a tree stump or something.
Of course, far more people buy SUVs and trucks than actually need them. Also lite trucks would have been the better solution for most people who do actually need them if the EPA hadn’t killed them with poorly written standards. With the current wheelbase based efficiency requirements we’re left with the choice between sedans that drag the undercarriage on residential speedbumps or a Landbarge 9000 toddler slaughter special with worse sight lines than an abrams tank and the (lack of) fuel efficiency to match.
the EPA hadn’t killed them with poorly written standards
Thank you! I see so many people blaming the manufacturers for greed. No, the EPA killed the small truck. Perfect example of well-meaning laws paving the road to hell.
I have a Santa Cruz. It’s my little half-truck and it’s badass.
Elderly people and people with certain disabilities can have difficulty entering and exiting low vehicle seats.
And loading/unloading a car trunk.
But being high make them incredibly dangerous for other road users. If a normal car hits you, you break your leg, it sucks, but within a month you’d walk on crutches and within 6 month you’d be fine. A SUV hitting a pedestrian or a cyclist will break their pelvis or even their back which has a harder recovery and long lasting consequences.
These stuff should be banned
Social Media 100%.
I’d say specifically the predatory algorithms.
Consumer grade AI, Social Media is a close second.
Why is AI bad?
I mean it’s not perfect, but it’s only going to get better.
Facial recognition technology. Not only is it not as perfect as people claim in identifying people, but some countries are using it to attack the LGBT since it was discovered the LGBT have different variances in facial features. And yet that’s not even 100% perfect, so now you have a bad technology for a negative purpose repurposed into another negative purpose that it’s causing collateral damage with because it’s as awful at that as the first thing.
By the same token gait recognition.
Just pointing out I read that whole article and there was nothing in it to suggest that any countries are using it to attack LGBT people
Dunno why you linked it instead of something more relevant
Clickbait.
Internet advertising.
Generative AI or facial recognition tech.
proof-of-work blockchains. instead of a utopian decentralized currency we have a utopia for scammers and day traders, and uses a ton of energy at a time when we need to conserve to combat global warming.
All while aiming to be cash you can e-mail, and failing at that because its high volatility and low speed make it a completely artificial commodities market with nearly zero real-world applications. It’s a technology that took off because Paypal is the devil and it is arguably worse.
corporate personhood.
Is that really a 21st century idea? I would have thought that was a reaganomics reform tbh
well citizens united was 21st and encoded it in law.
Speak for yourself American
I bet it effects you more negatively than decisions your country has mad unless your british or not a democracy.
It’s a 19th century idea that appeared in the published decision of the Supreme Court in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co.
Only—get this—it wasn’t even what the Court decided. Instead, it was the guy in charge of recording the decision for publication who declared “corporate personhood” in the headnote (summary) of the case. And would it surprise you to learn that the guy was the former president of a railroad company? We just sort of went along with this not-precedent until the Citizens United case.
yeah but citizens united codified it into us law.
That’s pre-21st century though.
it was 2010
Negative. Corporate personhood predates Citizens United v. FCC (which is what I assume you’re referring to). IMO: The ruling itself still counts as an answer to the original question though!
It’s a bad enough idea we don’t need anymore for the next few centuries.
According to someone else in here, it was 19th, and that sounds right to me. I’m guessing early 19th.
It’s just a neat legal fiction for some purposes.
subscriptions
I’m not sure how far back you have to go, but those are definitely pre 19th century
VR is late 20th century
Huh what
There was the Virtual Boy and some other things before 2001 (21st century) rolled around. The tech wasn’t good/miniaturized enough back then
You know, I actually kind of like VR. What’s your main criticism of the concept itself?
It might be funny to hear but I am specialized in vr. Well, I could criticize it in many ways. In the case of this picture, it’s comparable to people being excited about GMO, but being against it because of how capitalism manages to fuck it up.
Yeah, that’s fair. Most of the VR stuff out there has a pretty walled-garden feel.
If I could pick your brain a bit, what are the big computational bottlenecks these days?
Honey I thought you’d never ask, here’s my two bits in lay terms:
If I’d have to give one quick answer it would be memory latency. The fact is that memory and computational power have grown immensely over the years, but the time it takes to retrieve a bunch of data from the memory hasn’t really improved at the same rate. Some quick math shows that the speed of light must be an issue. The solution to that is to create smaller devices, such as the SOCs (system on a chip) that we are starting to see the past few years.
In less technical words: The postal service is darn slow. Only a few days ago you figured out you needed something small to continue your work, and since then you’ve been waiting and idling. The roads are fantastic, it’s just that there’s a speed limit. The solution is to take all the villages and condense them into a city, shortening the distances.
There’s a lot more to it than that, and that’s just one of the issues on only a hardware level and only one of the solutions.
Yeah, that’s pretty typical for a lot of computing these days. People are talking about exotic things like in-memory processing as a way forward because of that.
Is that the whole thing, or is there something more specific to VR? You can make a smartphone no problem, but portable goggles end up with an ungodly short battery life.
The battery life is actually one of the downsides of accessing a lot of memory. A typical way to solve this is to do a depth draw first and then another one that actually samples textures. Textures and even meshes use a lot of bandwidth. But that won’t work for all devices because many use their own special ways to solve this by using a screen grid with buckets and depth sorting the tris.
A unique issue for vr is that you have to render for two eyes and at a high frequency. A typical mobile game might target 30 fps instead of the typical 60 when running on battery. On the contrary, if a vr game would run at 60 fps you’d get nauseated pretty easily. A low end device will run at 100, and in an overly simplified sense that means you’re actually doing 200 fps because of the two eyes. Further, you have to consider the tracking cameras. I am not knowledgeable about those but it’s safe to assume they need to send a lot of data around.
Alright then. Thanks for the info!
