Tech billionaires are buying up luxurious bunkers and hiring military security to survive a societal collapse they helped create, but like everything they do, it has unintended consequences.
technology
The super-rich ‘preppers’ planning to save themselves from the apocalypse
theguardian.comVergecast — 26 August 2022
theverge.comI Made an Internet Time Machine
youtube.comServer Manifesto
hatjecantz.deSimulating an Entire Car Engine
youtube.com‘It's dopamine’: why we love to track our watching and reading habits
theguardian.comAbsurd AI-Generated Professional Food Photography with DALL-E 2
minimaxir.comPlastic Recycling Doesn't Work and Will Never Work
theatlantic.comThe first problem is that there are thousands of different plastics, each with its own composition and characteristics. They all include different chemical additives and colorants that cannot be recycled together, making it impossible to sort the trillions of pieces of plastics into separate types for processing.
Childish Font Sizes
cloudfour.comThese days, the arguments for a 16-pixel baseline are widely accepted: We have plenty of data supporting its readability, it can prevent unintentional zoom in mobile browsers, and it’s been the default in every major browser for many years.
But there are plenty of reasons to go even larger…
ongoing by Tim Bray — 5G Skeptic
tbray.orgWhen I was working at AWS, around 2017 we started getting excited pitches from companies who wanted to be part of the 5G build-out, saying that obviously there’d be lots of opportunities for public-cloud providers. But I never walked away convinced. Either I didn’t believe the supposed customers really needed what 5G offered, or I didn’t believe the opportunity was anywhere near big enough to justify the trillion-dollar build-out investment. Six years later, I still don’t. This is a report on a little online survey I ran, looking for actual real-world 5G impact to see if I was wrong.
The (Edited) Latecomer's Guide to Crypto
mollywhite.net[The article] uncritically repeated many questionable or entirely fallacious arguments from cryptocurrency advocates, and it appears that no experts on the topic were consulted, or even anyone with a less-than-rosy view on crypto. This is grossly irresponsible.
Here, a group of around fifteen cryptocurrency researchers and critics have done what the New York Times apparently won’t.