He didn’t think he wasn’t smart enough for uni, he thought the concept of uni was stupid.
Which still, yeah, someone who thinks that way probably shouldn’t go to uni. But it’s not quite the same.
Personally I’m more impressed by a $1k Garmin than a $250k Rolex or whatever.
while(true) {
scenario = Scenarios.rand()
time = DateTime.now()
while DateTime.now() - time < DateTime.minutes(5) {
scenario.continue()
}
}
It’s a convention. And not one that everyone follows. In Australia we use meteorological seasons, which start on the first of the month. So today is precisely one third of the way through summer.
Because of what you said, I do think that the way we do it is better. It puts the solstice (the day literally called "midsummer") closer to the middle of the season, and also makes more sense because it puts seasons aligned with the human calendar.
Ultimately, the 4 seasons are a human invention and we can choose where we put them.
Edit: meteorological seasons start on the first of the month. The name for when you start on the solstice/equinox is astronomical seasons.
It’s focus isn’t on bikes and pedestrian
No, it wasn’t, and that’s exactly the problem. Car dependent infrastructure is so bad for society and he was proposing a concept that would entrench it to a degree that would make today’s anglosphere look like a utopian Nordic paradise by comparison. Underpasses can be ok options in the right circumstances, but pedestrian bridges almost never are: they’re car infrastructure to keep pesky pedestrians out of the way of the all-important car traffic and are exceedingly inconvenient to use. As for signalled crossings, that’s fine, but doesn’t help much at the huge number of unsignalised crossings, or in local streets.
Fundamentally, you cannot fix the problems of cars by adding more cars. You fix it by making it easier for more people not to drive. With better, more frequent, quicker public transport connections and with safe, separated, direct cycle paths. It's indicative of the techbro mindset to think more fancy AI, even if the AI was capable of doing so much more than it really is, can fix all sorts of problems.
I also don’t really think the end of Hello Internet was esspecially out of the blue, or unreasonable
Ending it was not unreasonable. Ending it and then saying nothing for months, before having your cohost release a lie stating that it hadn’t ended is unreasonable by any metric. It would have taken so little effort to put a post up on the subreddit saying "thanks for all the good times, but we’ve decided we’ve exhausted what we can talk about, you can keep up with me on my YouTube or my productivity podcast at these links."
You don’t get to give your fans cutesy nicknames and invite them to send you postcards en mass to vote on a community flag and then pretend to maintain the sort of faceless transactional relationship you described there. You just don’t, and it’s ridiculous to pretend otherwise.
I should add one more point to the list though that I just remembered while writing this, which is his defence of the extremely problematic Kurzgesagt during that channel’s integrity debacle, and his completely silent use of bots to shadowban anyone who pointed out how shady Kurzgesagt was being through the whole thing. Say one bad thing about Kurzgesagt and get blocked from ever discussing a CGPGrey video or podcast again on his subreddit, without you even knowing that that’s happened to you. In case you’re not familiar with the incident itself, I’ll copy-paste a summary into this post in an edit shortly after I submit this comment (because I need to swap devices to get it).
Kurzgesagt debacle
It started when a YouTuber whose channel is called Coffee Break reached out to Philip of Kurzgesagt as part of a video he was doing into the flaws of popular science communication. Specifically, about some significant errors in K's video on Addiction. Instead of agreeing to collaborate, or even giving a simple "not interested, sorry", K took an instant accusatory tone, claiming CB must have been making a "gotcha" piece. CB and K agreed that they would talk more about the matter to try and assuage K's concerns, but K kept stalling while working on a retraction video, at which time K took down the video that was the impetus for this discussion (shortly after, as one of those aforementioned stalling efforts, having said "I never could bring myself to take it down", claiming it would be "cruel and unnecessary" to do so—funny, considering in his AMA attempting to spin the story, he said "I was really stressed out about the addiction and the refugee video for years. Being finally open about my mistakes and deleting them felt like weight leaving my body."). The Refugee video was also taken down along with the Addiction one that CB was interested in.
K claims to be interested in science communication. But here, he decided to make the selfish decision to do what he thought would protect his own personal brand through duplicitous means. He got ahead of the story that falsely assumed was coming, and put up a pre-emptive response to that. Now, CB isn't entirely blameless. In response to the above, CB put out a rather hot-headed reaction to the whole incident. He didn't follow up with K to try to understand what had happened; he lashed out in anger at K's self-righteous arse-covering video.
And then CB started getting harassed. K called out CB, and many of K's friends (other very large, powerful YouTubers such as CGP Grey and Philip de Franco) made very public statements to their audiences attacking CB. It ended up forcing CB into taking down his video, deleting a whole heap of tweets explaining what happened, and putting out an apology. Perhaps it was an apology that CB should have indeed made, but the need for an apology from K was much, much greater. And one never came. K used his larger platform to spin the narrative so that his large audience, and now also the general public who becomes aware of this, almost all take his side.
Incidentally, here's the video that CB was working on at the time. Hari, the scientist discussed in the video whom K worked with on his video discussed earlier, communicated very well with CB on it.
And as a separate thing that came out a while after this, Both Kurzgesagt and CGP Grey were early members of Nebula. Today, Nebula is fairly well-known as a creator-owned streaming service. Creators literally have an ownership stake in the business, and are paid out a slice based on their viewership (I don't think the exact formula is public, but presumably some function including number of views, view hours, etc.).
But early on, when it was still taking the shape we know it in today, Grey and Kurzgesagt were members with an ownership stake. They left it a long time ago citing "creative differences" (or some vague nonsense like that). From little pieces that have come out on the rare occasions that existing Nebula creators have said something about it, apparently those two were less interested in the vision of Nebula as a place where multiple creators support each other in growing their collective revenue; instead they wanted to take more of a parasitic approach where they could profit off of the backs of other, smaller creators. Because the then-co-owners weren't interested in that, Grey and Kurzgesagt ended up leaving.
double
I hope you're not storing time in floating point.
The productivity hack stuff is only one small part of it, but I do think it's more relevant than you suggest. He's got a podcast that's all about how to be more productive, meanwhile he's put out zero main videos (i.e. , not a follow-up or ad) since July '23.
But the main things that bug me are different from that.
The first thing that really pissed me off was when he put out an apology after his missile silo urbex video. In it, he used the wrong name for a missile. The one he mentioned was submarine based and the right one was land based, or vice versa. I forget, because ultimately it was such a minor nitpick it really didn't matter. But Grey made a huge deal about it and said it was such an important issue with the video he was compelled to correct the record. Which wouldn't be such a problek—maybe he just holds himself to a very high standard—if it weren't for the fact that he has multiple videos whose most basic thesis is directly conflicting with expert consensus, including one based on Jared Diamond's Guns Germs and Steel, which pushes a deterministic narrative popular with racists. His pro-Tesla AI-hyping techbro bs with the "automation with kill all jobs" video wasn't great, but his "autopilot is going to fix traffic" is even more directly harmful considering how detrimental it would be to cyclists and pedestrians to do things the way he suggests…if it's even technically possible.
Then there's the more direct disrespect to his most dedicated fans with how he cancelled Hello Internet. I don't think anyone expects them to keep the podcast going indefinitely, but to have a community as strong as HI did and not ever make any public statement himself, and only have his co-host day that they're on a temporary hiatus six months after the final episode, and no further updates after that. It was very disrespectful and it says a lot to me about the kind of man he is. He didn't genuinely see us as the community we thought we were, but a means to an end. He's one of those disingenuous influencer types—he was just better than most at hiding it for a long time.
Hells yeah! !fuckcars@lemmy.world, !notjustbikes@feddit.nl.
The original footage as in footage of the Trinity test?
I suspect it would already be public domain under US law, but would lack the coverage they'd need to do anything meaningful with it.
Yeah exactly. Normal inheritance means their kids or spouse inherit, and the number of billionaires remains the same.
Transcription
A picture of a hand holding remote car keys pointed at a white pickup truck. Below that is the text:
In the US, 75% of truck owners tow only once a year or less. Nearly 70% of them go off-road once a year or less. Additionally, 35% of truck owners haul something in their truck beds once a year or less
Find Sources @ unbelievablefactsblog.com
That article is just as useless as the comment it replies to, because it fails to acknowledge the fact that marking the start of the season with the solstice is only a convention that some places observe. Others do not.