standardUser

You can either support the status quo or you can support change. You seem to have chosen the third option, blanket cynicism, which is more like opting out. Yes, there are bad examples of every-single-thing in the world, and you can choose to cling to those bad examples and throw your hands in the air instead of engaging more critically and looking for ways to build instead of mock. The cynic's path accomplishes nothing and, frankly, poisons the world for those who give a fuck.

Tariffs may be more politically feasible moving forward, but not these extreme tariffs and sudden trade wars that are driven by Trump's temper tantrums and benefit no one.

The Trump presidency, and his absurd trade wars, are deeply unpopular in the US. I'd be shocked if most Canadians don't understand this fully and see Trumpism for the personality-driven anomaly that it is.

The difference between gambling and any other compulsion or addiction is that only gambling can leave you broke and destitute in a single day, without regard for starting wealth. Maybe findom, but going completely broke is generally not the purpose.

The difference between drugs and other addictions is that (certain) drugs greatly increase the risk of death.

So I say let's divide it in two - addictions that can kill you or leave you in financial ruin in a single evening, and those that cannot.

Big Tech has accumulated too many grievances across too many segments of society and made too much money in the process, so let's not act surprised at a backlash. And data centers are remarkably well-suited as a focal point for people to express those accumulated grievances. So I wouldn't look too hard at all the many and varied reasons that data centers are being opposed, but instead at the quickness and ferocity and consistency with which they are being opposed. It reminds of the movement in the US and Canada in the 90's to oppose unfettered globalization - though this already feels larger and more widespread (and less late to the party).

A growing segment of young men increasingly embrace violence, conspiracy theories, far-right politics and machismo in general. Women can tolerate and even embrace a lot of male-coded things, like sports and cars and video games, but do you really expect them to embrace the manosphere or Trumpism? Not to say that this is universal - but there is a clear trajectory and we see it throughout the developed world (see: South Korea).

Those 60-year-olds existed in a brief and exceptional moment of wealth creation brought about by factors that are unlikely to happen again in ours or our children's lifetime. The problem being that the American ethos decided to pretend that brief moment was normal and sustainable.

"Marriage follows the same pattern. Women now substantially outnumber men on university campuses and outpace them in degrees earned, yet the preference for husbands who match or exceed a wife’s income and education has not correspondingly relaxed. The result is a radical market mismatch."

I read a lot on this particular topic and this is a little too narrow of a reading. There is a more dominant trend - women and men are drifting apart culturally faster than they are economically. Men who keep pace culturally can get away with falling behind economically, and, to a lesser degree, vice versa. But you can't fall behind on both and expect to find a lot of women interested in dating or marrying you.

The genius part is that the negotiations that determine how much they can get away with charging completely excludes the consumer. Two for-profit entities, with no mandate to actually provide care, decide how much they should pay each other.

And then do what, precisely? Quit your job and find one with better insurance options?

If hitting a home run is getting a woman pregnant, then I'd wager men are hoping to strike out in 3 pitches during 99.5% of their at bats.

I don't think most adults can get much social value or satisfaction from an AI conversation they know is not a real person. Those who can get that satisfaction likely have so few human-to-human interactions that an AI companion may be as good a solution to chronic loneliness as any.

I'd be more worried about the inevitable robo-nannies who could end up talking more to young children than actual people.

“Obesity and diabetes could easily account for all of this,”

Wither Ozempic? I've seen several friends and family members use it to great effect and thought it might sweep the nation. But I imagine most of the same barriers that keep people from eating better or moving more are also in play when trying to engage with any new habit.

Seems like a minor issue, since most men only utilize their sperm two or three times in their entire lives, if at all. Maybe men should be freezing sperm while they're young and virile.