Respectfully, you’ve asked the wrong question. The process to create AI started decades ago (arguably, longer).

…capable of rational thinking, that is creative, that it’s self aware and have consciousness.

As you’ve described it, consider how this is any different than human procreation.

The answer is the ability for a ‘computer’ to have instantaneous access and ability to process the world’s information.

Assuming a sentient “cyber” AI is inevitable and you’re wondering about our “own will and desires”, the question should be, who do you think should create the rules for AI to ensure it’s making the right choices today and beyond the time of our species.

Or, to put it another way, who gets to be God and Moses?

I’m not shaming anyone and wealth inequality has nothing to do with this.

Anyone who believes the average salaried worker should be able to afford all the subscription services, a $60k car, a three bedroom home, and everything available at a grocery store is delusional. Marketing and corporate propaganda and influencers have made everyone to believe it’s your god given right to make $50k and live like the upper middle class. That’s not wealth inequality. It’s delusion.

No one has any concept of living within their means. If you make $50k; you should be shopping at farmers markets, you should have very few subscriptions (if any), you shouldn’t be buying a brand new car, you should be renting and living with a roommate to split the bills. That’s not wealth inequality. That’s personal finance 101.

You want to talk about shaming people, point your finger at social media and influencers. They make it seem like everyone should be taking on more debt to buy shit that won’t last one season. My 16 year old nephew wants a $250 hoodie he saw on TikTok. My 7 year old niece wants to do a shopping challenge she saw on YouTube. People are being manipulated to be consumers. To consume far beyond their means.

People have lost all concept of personal fiscal responsibility and what the value of things are. It’s really basic math and economics. No one wants to talk about that though. They want to play the victim card and blame everyone else because they believe “luxury” is owed to them. And then, when given the choice to put people in power to actually make these systematic changes you speak of, people explicitly vote against them.

I do have an abundance of time when it comes to meal preparation. I work ten hours a day but I wake up at 5am to prep for the day. I take half of my Sunday to walk to farmers markets and other local shops. I prioritize food because it’s literally of vital importance. The weeks when I don’t have time to make food; I eat poorly, I feel bad, I have a lot less money.

Your argument is that 70% of Americans have no choice but to buy the cheapest things possible?

Judging by the success of companies like Amazon, Netflix, Apple, and DoorDash, that seems like an unreasonable argument.

People have more money than they like to admit. They just don’t want to skimp on things they believe to necessities but are actually luxuries. Fresh food is cheaper than processed food. It’s cheaper to buy ingredients to make cheeseburgers than it is to buy them at McDonalds. I buy food from the farmers market because I can’t afford the grocery store. If you’re truly struggling to buy food, you should register for food stamps. Every farmers market I’ve been to accepts them.

Sadly, you’re not wrong. I’ve found that when it comes to food though, most small businesses stay small. You don’t get into regenerative farming to get rich - you do not because you want to be the change you want to see in the world. Frankly, we need a lot more people to embrace race these sorts of values.

We had a local butcher who survived for seven years but closed their doors last year. The pandemic really hit everyone one way or another. https://share.inquirer.com/tnXDXl | https://heathermaroldthomason.substack.com/about

When it comes to other stuff, I’ve been going second hand or just abstaining all together from buying things. I’ve already got a lot of shit. A lot of it was actually really quality stuff from upstarts on Kickstarter - all of whom were out of business in a few years. We justify purchasing things we don’t need because they look pretty and they “support local businesses”. It’s so compelling and it feels good to support humans over corporations. Maybe we really don’t need more stuff to begin with.

Other times, the tried and true makers - the corporations - are the way to go. For instance, it’s tempting to get a trendy new MadeIn cookware set but a used Calphalon might be a better product and last longer and doesn’t generate new waste. There was a subreddit for stuff like this which I can’t remember right now. There’s buyitforlife but I think there was another one.

And I’m saying that people need to consider more than just the sticker price when making choices about nourishment.

We are not slaves to corporations. Wow have the power to not purchase their products. They get away with selling shit product for inflated profit because people don’t care. If you don’t care, then you can’t blame the corporation. That’s just insane to believe a corporation is going to do something on behalf of consumers. They answer only to their stockholders.

Maybe when people stop playing the victim card we’ll see some real change.

Convenience and cheapness has won. No one cares about a quality product. It’s better to buy more cheap things than few good things, people think.

This is mostly evident in fashion and appliances today because we already embraced this with food decades ago.

The corporations want you to spend all your money, and money you’ve yet to earn, right now. Everything is bought on credit (in many cases, you can’t even pay with cash anymore).

Especially in America, people want as much ‘stuff’ as possible for the least amount of money. What’s often missing from this stuff is quality. The only way to reduce the retail price is to reduce the cost of production. This means your food is made cheaply with exploited natural resources and cheap labor. A lot of American grown food is shipped to China for processing then shipped back to the US for sale, all to meet the demands of cheaper food.

I would offer to everyone that they take some time to consider what they’re buying, how frequently they buy it, and where it comes from. No government or corporation is going to change what you eat.

Start with reducing your meat consumption at every meal. Instead of a 12 ounce steak, get 10 ounces. Instead of a 5 piece chicken meal, get a three piece. Double or triple up on your vegetables.

The real changes happen when you start to cook for yourself. Just buying whole foods instead of processed foods is going to cut your grocery bill down dramatically. Compare the per pound cost of a whole chicken to boneless chicken breasts per pound. Also - have you noticed how woody and gigantic chicken breasts are now? Buy a whole chicken, butcher it, save money, eat delicious food.

Again, no one is going to do this work for you. And no one’s going to force Big AG farmers to start regenerative farming. Especially given the promises of the incoming administration which may very well eliminate the USDA and EPA entirely. The new GOP is going to eliminate as many federal agencies as possible and shift them to states and corporations. The Republican Party is trying to put more responsibility in the hands of consumers. And when that doesn’t work (we’re too lazy to care) corporations will make the choices for us. Frankly, our consumer protections already suck so this is mostly already the case. But, as evident from this past election, more people in this country want fewer consumer protections.

This story is happening because of consumer demand and ignorance. People walking into Walmart to get groceries have no clue what’s going on before they pick out their produce and protein. It blows my mind that a culture war is happening over the price of eggs being over $2. Eggs should not cost that little.

Moreover, I feel strongly that of all things a person spends their time and money on, it should be food. Food, Water, Air, and Sleep should be at the pinnacle of everyone’s priorities.

Please, assess your finances and figure out how to prioritize sourcing and preparing quality food. Please find a local farmers’ market. Support local businesses who put their earnings back into your community. Keep tabs on farmers who use regenerative farming and spend a portion of your food budget with them. These are the things that should matter more than a Netflix or YoutubeTV subscription.

Yes, this takes work. It takes work you’re paying corporations to do for you and they’re cutting corners (to put it lightly) to get you the cheapest crap permissible. Instead of asking, “why is this so expensive”, we should be asking “why is this so cheap”. Shifting priorities towards nourishment and away from convenience and streaming subscriptions should hopefully give you some opportunity to see things this way.

“Good enough”, Demand, and Scale.

The contractor grade stuff is designed to be durable and good enough. Most people will find it attractive and suitable for their esthetic. Seasonal re-designs are safe by following design trends established at trade shows. Contractors can rely on the product not failing so they continue to buy it for all their projects.

The fancy stuff is often made for different countries and can have different parts and specifications. If more (assuming we’re talking about America here) people wanted this stuff, the manufacturing would increase and the costs would come down. However, a lot of times the reason people buy the expensive stuff is specifically because it’s bespoke and “hand crafted”. If a Gucci bag cost $50, it wouldn’t be worth the name.

You need demand to bring down costs. This increases the scale required and ability to afford better technology to make more.

The tools needed to manufacturer something at large scale are expensive. If you house your own tools, how are you going to buy those tools if you don’t have money to buy them? If you’re going to contract manufacturing, why would a manufacturer make you something for little money when they can use their facility to make exponentially more widgets for another company? Just swapping out a die on a machine costs money. They’re not going to disrupt existing manufacturing for a few hundred widgets.

Ohhh. I see. They (Trump’s GOP) want to eliminate all federal agencies unless they can be used as punishment.

I’ve been convinced that they intend to follow through on the decades-long plan to push everything not explicitly in the constitution to the states or private corporations. This article suggests that the EPA could be used to punish ZEV states and force them to do what they want. Yeah - that makes more sense under a fascism.

The so-called ZEV states (for Zero Emissions Vehicles) do have something closer to an EV mandate, and from model-year 2026 in these states (California, Connecticut, Colorado, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia) a third of all new cars sold by each automaker will have to be battery-electric—assuming the EPA grants California a waiver to allow this to happen.

I just want to make you aware of what nearly every person starting out with photography eventually comes to learn sooner than later: you and your hobby and your bank account will go through some changes. Don’t expect to put out a couple thousand dollars and be done with it.

Of course, a cropped sensor is more than a reasonable place to start. Some would argue it’s a reasonable place to foster a career in photography.

Ergonomics has more to do with what kind of photography you’re shooting than anything else. Sports and wedding photography will dictate the need for a different set of controls than landscape or studio photography.

I’m a slow picture taker. I started with shooting film in the early '90s on a Canon AE1 Program. The ergonomics of the Fujifilm cameras spoke to me. I have been able to do some photoshoots for events, for bars/restaurants, and did a lot of studio photography with Fuji XT cameras. There have been times I found Fuji limiting in either its control system, it’s autofocus, or (more often) it’s low light performance. Most of the time my experience has helped me to work around any limitations. For example, it’s totally possible (sometimes preferable) to take great high ISO black and white images in low light when color images would look like ass. The high ISO noise in Fujfilm cameras can be great in B&W.

As I started getting into adapting third party lenses to my Fuji system, I became more invested in the characteristics of the lens itself. At the same time, as I was using manual focus lenses more and more, my photo taking got more intentional. It just made sense for me to shift to Leica where I could slow down even more and take advantage of the total characteristic of an expensive lens on a full frame sensor. As the name implies, a cropped sensor is not gathering the characteristics of the perimeter of the lens. I can tell you that my gateway combination was the Fuji XE2 and Voigtlander 40mm f1.4. A fantastic affordable manual focus pocketable-ish setup that I sometimes wish I still had.

I have different cameras for different things. The only digital cameras I have right now are the Leica M-P and Fuji X100V. The rest are 35mm and medium format film cameras. I’m shooting different subject matter today than I was five years ago so the cameras and ergonomics work well for my current needs. If I were to start shooting something else, I’d first consider how fast the subject was moving and what focal length I’d need then build a system around that. Last I looked at cameras, I was considering medium format or the Lumix S5 IIX. If I were considering a career in landscape photography, I would certainly get a medium format camera.

Another word of warning from experience, don’t spread yourself too thin. I had so many cameras and lenses but didn’t have the time to really become proficient with any of them. Again, this pointed me in the direction of Leica. One camera and a few quality lenses will make you a better picture taker than a cabinet full of gear.

LOL any blog is going to have clickbait. Even most mainstream news is largely made up of clickbait.

Are you looking for Apple news, Apple rumors, or some website constantly trying to sell you something via affiliate links?

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/

https://slashdot.org/index2.pl?fhfilter=apple

https://arstechnica.com/apple/

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/search-results?q=apple

https://www.reuters.com/site-search/?query=apple

I just searched for “submit short stories” and this was the first three results.

https://thewritelife.com/where-to-submit-short-stories/

https://blog.reedsy.com/guide/short-story/where-to-submit-short-stories/

https://writers.com/short-story-submissions

I started my digital photography journey with the Fuji X-T10. The photographs I’ve taken with it are still among some of my favorites. The last Fuji camera I owned was the X-T3. I’ve since moved on to Leica.

IMO, there’s little advantage to the Fuji system these days, aesthetics aside. Full frame mirrorless cameras are practically the same size and price, offer better low light performance, and better image quality.

I would say the first question you should ask yourself is how large you intend to print your images ten years down the road. I’ve had good results printing XT3 images up to 36" but I wouldn’t really go beyond that. The more you learn about photography, the more time you spend in post production zoomed into your images, the more you’ll notice the hardware’s shortcomings (even if others don’t). You never know when you’ll take a shot you fall in love with and want hanging on your wall. You might just want to post on social media now but your prerogatives may change down the road.

Then consider low light photography. The low iso performance of a full frame camera is almost always going to be better than on a cropped sensor.

Next, are you a collector? A lot of people can easily get obsessed with trying different lenses. For me, I started getting into adapting manual focus M Mount lenses to my Fuji which ultimately led me to Leica. Before I knew it, I amassed a collection of a couple dozen lenses just for X mount. Ebay gets something like a 30% cut on electronics now so it’s not as easy to buy and sell things as it used to be.

I would take a look at the lens options for each mount. The cameras themselves may be relatively comparable in price but the lens prices can get out of control. As a nature photographer (which I am not), you may want to look at zoom lenses in the 70-200 range. Compare the costs of these lenses across the board.

The analog esthetic of Fuji is what it took for me to switch from film photography. It’s a great gateway to digital. Eventually, the image quality became more important than “how it looks on a shelf”. Honestly, how it looks on a shelf has never been something I’ve given any thought to. How it feels in the hand and the joy it brings to use it in the field is what got me out of the house to take more pictures. You’ll have to figure out what your priorities are in the coming years and make adjustments.

If you want to stick to a budget, do not count on any camera you buy right now to last you a long time. Even the life of a lens is becoming shorter. As the resolving power of image sensors increase, manufacturers are forced to create better and bigger lenses to keep up. If you were to spend maybe three to five thousand dollars, then maybe possibly you might be able to keep shooting with what you have for a decade or more, if you’re okay missing out on advancing technology.

Lastly, (landscape/slow-moving wildlife) don’t forget to budget for a good tripod. That should last you forever so get the best one with the features you need.

Oh, last lastly, do not be so quick to take the first word of advice you get nor listen to popular “influencers”. The internet has given us all easy opportunity to digest and rehash biased (paid for) information about things we have little to no hands on experience with. Be cautious of any with affiliate links.

Interesting. The people I now brag about hiring the best people. Bringing them in from top universities around the world and bragging about how well they pay them. Perhaps the people I know are the exception because they are setting the bar for being known as well paying organizations. They’re explicitly paying well to entice people out of other competing organizations.

Profit is literally the surplus value of the worker’s labor.

No it’s not. Profit is dictated by the business. Any business sets the price of their good or service in order to cover overhead and expand the business. If you’re sitting at home writing code all day as Ian independent contractor, how are you going to set your hourly wage? Are you going to just calculate what it costs to pay for electric and buy lunch for the eight hours you’re working? I would hope not. You’re going to calculate your expenses and multiple that to reach a figure that pays for the rest of your life plus money for expanding your operations. Are you exploring yourself in order to purchase health insurance or save up for a new computer?

I’m sorry but I’m tired explaining basic business concepts to people. This shouldn’t be hard. I understand people like Walmart workers and coalminers are treated like shit but this concept that every human who works for a living is being exploited is just trash. You need a better argument.

Value of a brand is created from consumer perspective. Value of a company is created by balancing operational expenses. There is nothing explicit in either of these that is exploitive and to suggest so is a broadly uninformed claim.

If human labor is involved in a company, why are you all so stuck on the concept that people are not being paid for their work? How is it that simply by being an employer, you are exploiting staff? I mean, I admit I’m totally being exploited at my current job but I’ve had other jobs where I was paid extremely well and given great opportunities. Are you talking about specific industries? Specific corporations? Is the guy selling kabobs down the street from me exploiting his staff?

You guys are either being dishonest with me or dishonest with yourselves. Or you really have no idea what you’re talking about and just regurgitating what you’ve heard other people say.

You cannot have that much wealth and operate in an ethical way, it’s not possible. Just like you cannot have non-consensual sex with somebody in an ethical way, there is no scenario where that is possible.

You are starting your argument off with two entirely different concepts. Employees are paid for their work because they are employees. Non-consensual sex is the explicit lack of agreement to be in the situation.

Please, tell me WHY it is unethical to employ people? How is it exploitive to run a business? At what point does a company make so much money that it’s unethical for them to continue doing business?

I’m on board with a coop and democratically run operations. When in history has any company ever succeeded as such? To my knowledge, these are locally run organizations with no ability to scale up. So, how do we end up with big nation and world changing projects? Is it your belief that we shouldn’t have large scale projects? We shouldn’t have corporations like Google or Caterpillar or Visa? Is it your belief that we should must destroy everything we know and go back to village life? Are these real things that you think have to happen or is this in an idealistic world? How do you take what we have now and make it into your image?

That’s a grossly simplified and inaccurate history of insulin.

What I’m hearing you say is - I have no clue what these people who make so much money actually do but I’m of the firm belief that they’re paid a lot of money to do nothing. If I were you, and I have been and continue to be someone who finds so much in life curious and puzzling, I would take a moment to learn a bit more about the area before I make such bold claims about things I only know about from social media. Perhaps look up “what does a CEO do” or “why do CEOs make so much money”.

But to provide some answer to your question, from my experience, the CEOs I’ve known are super over achievers. The people I’ve known are working 24/7/365 while they appear to have somewhat fulfilling family lives. For them to take time off of work is like dying. They just can’t stop.

Granted, the CEOs I’ve known aren’t CEOs at multiple companies. They may be on a board of directors and they may be presidents of organizations in addition to their CEO title. I’m not sure I’ve heard of someone being a CEO at more than one company.

Part of the compensation for a CEO is so they can hire people to work from them (that’s how I know these people). The company is going to pay them well enough that they can hire cleaners and contractors and housekeepers and nannies to afford them the opportunity to continue their work all day without interruption. So, an average CEO household might have four people on staff for them at any given time. I can tell you, these people are paid crazy money so that’s a good half a million dollars right there that someone is being paid so they can live a life dedicated to their job, not because of the effort they put into it.

I mean, in regard to effort expended, if I mom can own and operate a local bakery while taking care of the home and coaching girls soccer and being president of the PTA, what makes a CEO any different? Just because they’re paid a lot more? A local bakery is serving the local community. It’s only ever going to generate a finite income and offer a finite value to the neighborhood. A CEO is, presumably, managing a national or international organization making millions or billions of dollars. They mange the people who manage hundreds or thousands of employees. The choices they make impact all the lives of the employees as well as the clientele and the bottom line for the company.

From the average person’s point of view, it’s obscene how much money these people are paid. From their perspective, it’s quite logical. IMO, I think there’s a cap on what a CEO should make - not because it should be regulated but because the company is just throwing money away. However, I’m aware that these people are in high demand because of the work they provide so companies are bidding for them. Sign on packages and yearly bonuses reach the sky just to acquire someone, regardless of the value they’re currently providing the company.

So, how do you fight something like this?

Ok. Well I can’t understand how you think an athlete is stealing money they’ve signed a contract to receive. Do you think you’re stealing money at your job? Is your 50 year old friend stealing money? At what point are you not stealing money? Who decides what’s theft or what’s not?

I was not aware media outlets were talking about how amazing and hardworking billionaires are. No. Do you have some examples?

No. They establish companies (employee people) to build, manage, and maintain these organizations as they dictate. They’re actively involved in the principles of the organization and maintain a seat on the board of directors to ensure upper management is fulfilling their vision. A lot of their work is with lawyers to make sure everything is done legally and to push legislation through city council to keep the project on time. Sometimes a project will involve contributions to the city like parks or public spaces so they work with architects to design those projects too. That’s a very small part of what I’m aware of what they do.

They are giving away hundreds of millions of dollars for the future benefit of lives well beyond their own time. They’re doing more by establishing these long-term enterprises than they ever could by simply giving out money. Because that’s what makes sense in the reality we live in.

Are you saying that wealthy people should not use their money to build hospitals or help dying kids?