Oy With the Poodles Already

Which is correct!

But this is often framed as me approaching the right wing naively by the respondent.

That's not the case at all. I know they're evil. The goal is to demonstrate that they're lying by exposing the way the rhetoric fails to line up with reality.

The play is to:

Demonstrate that the policy doesn't work

Demonstrate that the people enforcing the policy have everything they need to know it doesn't work

Provide the context of what the policy achieves in the absence of its "intended" outcome.

Remind people that the purpose of a system is what it does.

The European Union already forced Apple to abandon its proprietary charging port and adopt USB-C across its entire iPhone lineup. It just did something bigger. A new EU mandate requires every smartphone sold in Europe including Apple devices to feature a battery that can be replaced by the user without specialist tools, without voiding a warranty, and without sending the device to a manufacturer approved service center. Batteries must maintain a minimum capacity threshold after a set number of charge cycles and replacement parts must remain available for up to ten years after a model goes on sale.

The consumer electronics industry built its current business model around batteries that degrade, cannot be replaced at home, and create a natural upgrade cycle every two to three years. The EU just legislated that model out of existence in the world's largest regulatory market.

Apple, Samsung, and every other manufacturer now faces a choice between redesigning their devices for the European market or accepting that their current hardware architecture is no longer legally sellable there.

Portable device batteries that maintain at least 80% of their capacity after 1000 cycles are exempt. Meaning that most Apple and flagship Samsung Galaxy phones are likely unaffected.

we're looking to create an AI policy, and when we were talking about this, my boss (older millennial) was genuinely shocked to hear that younger people do not (seem) to view AI positively (a la the recent commencement speakers being booed)

please rb for larger sample size!

Question 1/3

Thank you for helping with this data collection. Please rb for as big a sample as possible!

Reblogged imhereformysciencefriends

2h

odyver

13h

alright I've got to do some quick math to explain attitudes towards AI to my boss.

we're looking to create an AI policy, and when we were talking about this, my boss (older millennial) was genuinely shocked to hear that younger people do not (seem) to view AI positively (a la the recent commencement speakers being booed)

please rb for larger sample size!

Question 1/3

What is your age, and do you feel AI is a net positive or net negative in our lives today?

under 18, AI is a net positive0.1%

under 18, AI is a net negative3.7%

18-29, AI is a net positive1%

18-29, AI is a net negative50%

30-45, AI is a net positive1.1%

30-45, AI is a net negative

46-60, AI is a net positive0.1%

46-60, AI is a net negative3.2%

over 60, AI is a net postive<0.1%

over 60, AI is a net negative0.4%

19,681 votes • Remaining time: 6 days 10 hours

odyver

13h

Question 2/3

How often do you visit or interact with museums/archives (whether in person or online)?

Frequently (multiple times per month)15.6%

Often (multiple times per year)

Occasionally (a couple times per year)31.3%

Rarely (once every couple of years)13.7%

Never :(1.5%

17,250 votes • Remaining time: 6 days 10 hours

odyver

13h

Question 3/3

If you saw a museum was using AI in exhibits, marketing, research, etc., would you be more or less inclined to visit that museum?

under 18, more inclined<0.1%

under 18, less inclined3.5%

18-29, more inclined0.2%

18-29, less inclined50.9%

30-45, more inclined0.2%

30-45, less inclined

46-60, more inclined<0.1%

46-60, less inclined3.2%

over 60, more inclined<0.1%

over 60, less inclined0.4%

17,318 votes • Remaining time: 6 days 10 hours

Thank you for helping with this data collection. Please rb for as big a sample as possible!

🫶