nevermind

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

As for a specific technologies cookies seems like a good suggestion. Social media less so, because, uh, this forum is social media? Would crippling cookies have the effect of crippling online advertising systems? Because I definitely think that if you could kill variable online ads that would be a big deal and completely change incentives for the entire online ecosystem.

Changing models is hard, but not impossible. A membership/subscription basis is doable even in an environment where most people expect the web to be "free." If ads go away/greatly diminish in number, I think it's likely that people would cluster on fewer remaining free websites (which is a mixed result) and also would pay for membership on at least a few sites.

 

[Bohandas]

Honestly a large part of me wonders if we are any better now than we were as hunter gatherers. Sure, the individual life lasts longer and we don't die of simple infections. But look at the proportion of humanity living in poverty, without access to water and food...

So basically like a prehistoric person

 

[Scribe]

As for a specific technologies cookies seems like a good suggestion. Social media less so, because, uh, this forum is social media? Would crippling cookies have the effect of crippling online advertising systems? Because I definitely think that if you could kill variable online ads that would be a big deal and completely change incentives for the entire online ecosystem.

Cookies, and what leads to algorithms pushing us into ads, or oh, political or ideological bubbles, is the aspect of social media I mean.

A forum like this isnt 'social media' in the way the algorithm of twitter, or facebook or tiktok, or the various cancerous offshoots of those properties (instagram, whatever) makes social media a crippling aspect of our society.

Advertising works. Propaganda works. Changing News to "News Entertainment" works. Censorship works. If these things didnt work, billions would not be spent on them. The companies in charge of these systems are among the most powerful in the world, paying the best and brightest in the field, to shape discourse across every aspect of our lives.

By FAR, the most damaging 'progress' to the state of our society.

Now, if you'll excuse me, a cloud needs to be yelled at.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

As for a specific technologies cookies seems like a good suggestion. Social media less so, because, uh, this forum is social media? Would crippling cookies have the effect of crippling online advertising systems? Because I definitely think that if you could kill variable online ads that would be a big deal and completely change incentives for the entire online ecosystem.

Preventing cookies completely would kill all web applications, including forums. Outlawing persistent cookies would probably kill most online applications, mobile app, a lot of online analytics and tracking.

 

[Lidgar]

Nah, if I'm honest our society peaked in '99

Straight up quote from this guy.

 

[Scribe]

Straight up quote from this guy.

 

[Clint_L]

So for you, the effectiveness of nuclear deterrance is a net negative? I am afraid the two superpowers would have come to fight each other without it, and it didn't take nuclear weapons to raze Germany. Old school pointy sticks are very effective.

They’re not very effective at destroying life on earth as we know it. WW2, devastating as it was, killed a few percent of people. Nuclear war threatens total annihilation. The deterrence reward is not worth the risk. And it is only a matter of time until someone who doesn’t care about deterrence gets a nuke.

 

[briggart]

So for you, the effectiveness of nuclear deterrance is a net negative? I am afraid the two superpowers would have come to fight each other without it, and it didn't take nuclear weapons to raze Germany. Old school pointy sticks are very effective.

The largest single bomb raid over Nuremberg dropped something like 2500 tons of conventional explosives, killing ~ 2000 people, and required several hundred planes. In total, allied air raids over Germany are believed to have killed 500-600 thousand people during the whole war.

Each of the two Japan bombs released 15 - 20 kiloton of energy. Together they directly killed ~ 100 000 people.

And modern day nuclear bombs are ~ 1000 times more powerful than in WWII.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

The largest single bomb raid over Nuremberg dropped something like 2500 tons of conventional explosives, killing ~ 2000 people, and required several hundred planes. In total, allied air raids over Germany are believed to have killed 500-600 thousand people during the whole war.

Each of the two Japan bombs released 15 - 20 kiloton of energy. Together they directly killed ~ 100 000 people.

And modern day nuclear bombs are ~ 1000 times more powerful than in WWII.

That's the point. Using 2 little bombs killed 100,000 people, but avoided a bombing and invasion of Japan that would probably have been at least as bloody as the 500-600k victims in Germany (net positive). And it may have prevented other victims in unescalated or in prevented wars later on (net positive). It could kill a lot of people in the future (negative). Whether it is a net positive or negative depends on your valuation of the likelihood of these bombs being used in the future.

And, according to whom you ask the question, on whom (I could see people saying that since nukes protected them it's alright, and Ukraine being nuked doesn't change that, only proving than having nuclear deterrant is good, while other people would value human lives 1:1 and conclude it would have been better not to have any nukes involved).

 

[Umbran]

Would crippling cookies have the effect of crippling online advertising systems?

Crippling cookies would cripple your ability to log into a site and be you. That info is typically cookie-based.