FriendOfDeSoto

It’s an assumption that many people will be unemployed and unemployable in other functions. So far, every big change (like the Industrial Revolution or the advent of computers in the workplace) have lead to temporary displacements, and the longer ago it happened violent side effects. But in the big picture, we have found ways to put the human resource back into the machine. Accountants were supposed to go extinct with the arrival of Microsoft Excel. But their numbers have increased because they can do more useful things with their time than doing the math. The assumption may be more fear mongering. (And it’s too early to tell if you ask me.)

So I don’t think they will kill us off just yet because it isn’t entirely clear that we’re not needed. It’s also possible that so-called AI frees up people and resources that can be channeled into what are chronically underfunded professions today, like teaching or medical care. We have a tendency to think in Matrix or 1984 terms of the future when more positive outcomes exist.

Yes and no. If you order your “gold kit” off of an ad aimed at boomers worried about losing their houses, it is probably scammy.

If you’re very rich and worried, you could stash away a bit of bullion at your home. You’ll have other things of value you could trade on the black market of total societal collapse before you’d need to tap into that resource. If you’re not very rich, a gold bar is not going to do you much good because it’s a big chunk of change tied up in one item. You’re more likely to need smaller denominations, like coins or rings, to pay for stuff in the apocalypse. Or you need to learn to smelt metal. The scam of it all is that people with a financial interest will advertize gold as the safe resource in times of high perceived crisis when the price of gold is already high or rising. It makes much more sense financially to watch the market and buy when it’s down.

Gold is also something that needs the economy to come back before you ran out of other stuff to barter with. If our apocalyptical total collapse lasts a long time, gold will not be as valuable as drinking water, food, or shelter. Smokes (incl. vape juice) and booze might be more useful for a longer time.

I’m not rich and I’d sooner go down the prepper route than buying gold.

Like some of the other commenters here, I would not be surprised if that were so. Because racism.

However, I wonder if the premise of your question is true. Are there really no stories about Mexicans in fairy tale Europe? Or Japanese at the court of King Arthur? Or would they have you justify it more than a European in Wakanda? I’m sure Hollywood would care less about these stories but does that mean no one cares? I’m not sure. And since I’m not reading a lot of Mexican or Japanese authors I can only speculate.

The allure of stories like these is the unknown factor, the exotic, the strange. Thanks to centuries of colonization of the rest of the world, Europe is not exactly unknown or considered to be an exotic place in the rest of the world. This might contribute to a cultural bias.

In kennels in different houses 500 miles apart.

By physically separating them until they’re all done with puberty.

As an aside, not all siblings hate each other. Or what feels like hate growing up dissipates quickly when they reach adulthood.

If it bursts we’ll get a lot of data centers looking for something to do. And RAM prices will come down but … What’s causing the bottle neck right now is that your average RAM factory needs a couple of years from designed to built to working. So the supply is limited right now while the demand is high. While us end users can’t use the data center gear, in a pinch they could use ours. So the bottle neck gets tighter. So if the bubble collapses, supply will increase and that will bring prices down. If it bursts about two years from now, all the hastily built RAM factories will churn out cheap RAM. But none of this is guaranteed, not the busting and not the dead cheap prices. Because the demand for RAM will not drop off a cliff, it will most likely decrease slowly. All this processing power in post-burst idle data centers will find a way to be used - with what I do not know. There will still be a higher demand for RAM compared to pre-ChatGPT times. So RAM will not flood the market, we will just return to a relative equilibrium of the market.

Shit, I had hoped reaching out to his next of kin might be a good avenue to pursue. Causally chat with your neighbours, even the fully detached ones. Awkward, I know. But the guy is bound to have pissed them off on occasion as well. At the very least you’ll know you’re not alone in this. At best they could all call and complain on occasion. Naturally.

You are sure he’s mentally handicapped, right? I’m sure your council has been austeritied to the brink of non-functinality thanks to the delight that is UK politics of the last 20 years. I wonder if there is a charity organisation in your area that sort of stepped in, out of necessity. A mental health fire service/outreach of sorts. Even if they cannot help you with your case directly, they may know of more resources to deal with a person like that, seemingly self reliant but with episodes and delusions.

There are always cases that fall through the cracks. Not mad enough to be institutionalised, not well enough to live alone. He’s also too old to go to prison really and your best case scenario is to get him admitted somewhere.

Definitely have a chat with your mother about feeding the foxes. Try to sell it to her as a test. We’re going to test for x months if fewer animal noises lead to fewer weird shit coming from our neighbour.

Get him a ten pound Christmas gift and write him a card that’s 90 percent merry this and that and best wishes for the new year. And 10 percent if it’s possible please keep the volume of anything on a loudspeaker down, thank you for your cooperation. No threats, kill him with kindness. Leave it at his door. (Log that as well and keep a picture of text on the card.)

I imagine describing the mood between you and him as tense might be a bit of an understatement. Giving him fewer reasons to fear the family of werewolves next door might cause him to be less delusional? This is a last resort strategy but builds on the kill him with kindness idea. Get his bins in, offer to mow his lawn, that sort of thing. Slowly involve your brother.

Did you call the police when he sounded the siren at night? Like 999? From what I read here there is enough there to get him cited if not arrested.

You need to keep a paper log of every incident. Keep it factual, just answering the w questions, no “dickhead was a dickhead again”, just “Mr Smith turned on his radio at very loud volume at 6:30am on 6th December.” “I asked Mr Smith about the loud noise on 6th December at 6:30am when I saw him outside in his driveway at 9:23am. He told me he did it on purpose.”

I would call 999 for every noise complaint in the night and every threatening remark made against your brother at any time. You need a stronger paper trail for people to do something. You’ve complained to your council and you’ve talked to the police. It seems that wasn’t enough.

Don’t retaliate with loud music or deliberate harassment yourself. It might be hard not to. But you need to be spotless victims. You don’t want a ‘let’s look at both sides’ to give the impression you provoked anything at any time.

How is the third semi detached party feeling about this old guy? They must feel some of the nuisance? Surely they could corroborate that your brother isn’t doing werewolf things at night? See if you could get them to write letters or call the police as well. The more neighbours join in, the better (but don’t start a poster campaign, it should look “natural”).

Is there something that can be done to stop foxes from coming into the gardens? If they are the “werewolves” here then this could be a way to root out that delusion.

Does the old guy have family? Is there a way to reach out to them? Not in “reign in your fucking dickhead father!” but “we are really worried about your father’s mental state because he keeps making outlandish and unsubstantiated statements.”

Can you google if there is a solicitor in your area that will maybe hear your case for no or a low fee to see if you can take this to court? Either the old dickhead or the council for not doing anything about him? That’s where the paper log might be useful.

The only word of warning I would leave here is this: you said you’re all not at your best. Taking legal action will be additionally stressful and will cost money and time. Another thing that would cost money and time is selling the house and moving somewhere else. In the interest of your mental health, you should probably discuss this first, which path to follow. And although it is cynical, you also need to factor in that this problem will resolve itself naturally, probably within the next decade.

Neighbourhood disputes are not great. Your home should be your castle and somebody is shooting cannonballs at it. I’ve seen one case in my parent’s friend group that started with a fence encroaching on the other property, more than a decade of lawyers going back and forth, accusations of tyres being slashed, police calls for any minor infraction. This can consume people. Don’t get consumed.

Yes, the introduction of an individual, ethical “veto” came after the formation of national militaries like we know them today. There is built in tension to introduce a right to disobey into a system that otherwise demands obedience to function. It’s also hard to grasp as a concept even for the better educated. It’s fucked up. These days I’m thinking more and more about the adage that morale is something you need to be able to afford. And I understand every sergeant who feels like they don’t have any morale money to spend when ordered, say, to fire on shipwrecked drug smugglers. You piss off your boss and before you know it you’re dishonorably discharged back to the poverty stricken area you tried to get away from. Also, left-leaning liberals are a minority in a profession that practices how to kill people. There is so much gray there.

I say I understand the hypothetical sergeant in their moral life dilemma. As far as my respect is concerned, I can be totally black and white about this though.

The pessimistic take is none of this will matter because the US is moving further away from its constitutional order into a 21st century version of fascism. The military will be ridden of the morale “veto” and sworn to obey the leader no matter what. The optimistic take sees the current cult/fascistoid leadership edged out in 3-7 years and we will mostly see the homeopathic punishment I mentioned before. If we’re lucky, a tightening of the rules under which circumstances and with whose authority military units of any kind can be mobilized in peacetime within the US.

These names tend to be attached to them after the fact. I imagine there were a few Leonardos or Johannesses roaming about at their time so much like Alexander became The Great to set him apart from all other Alexanders, these names are scribes’ and historians’ shorthand to make clear which Leo or Joe you were talking about. And a few centuries of historical telephone later they seem to fit perfectly in our first name/last name system. Which in western Europe really only became officially standardized with the Code Civil from our friend Napoleon.

Or where they were from: da Vinci, Gutenberg. The Bible also doesn’t have a lot of action in China where last names were a thing before Jesus.

Soldiers have the right and the duty to resist illegal orders. I reserve respect for those who abide by that. Blind respect leads to blind eyes to when they eff up. And this American blind respect for active service members is so paradoxical in the face of how most veterans get treated.

The US military has survived the hot phase of the Korean War, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. And it probably should have taken more damage as an institution after each of these. It will survive 47 as well. Long drawn out procedures will meter out homeopathic doses of wrist slaps for most involved minus a handful of high profile scapegoats.

[Icey breath] No.

I can see dead people.

I don’t think it would be weird. It’s up to them if they accept or not. I would just suggest you make parallel plans as well to meet new people. A hobby group, a book club, etc.

I think there are two general (human) media preferences at work: “if it bleeds, it ledes” superceded by which deaths are more extraordinary. So soldiers murdered in peacetime is noteworthy. They could’ve become accountants but chose a career where there is a real and high risk of death. Btw I fear it’s that death math that made medical professionals drop out of noteworthiness post-pandy, i.e. the threat is real but the risk has gone down again. I think children dying generally of tragic circumstances will be noteworthy. Nurses contracting AIDS or non-famous people dying of natural causes become less noteworthy. And I use noteworthy here as what they chose to cover in their newsrooms. They have financial interests to consider as well, which brings us back to “if it bleeds.”

The American filter generally erases many “mundane” gun deaths from visibility. Either people are so numb it doesn’t register as the tragedy that it is or it doesn’t get covered. There are plenty of places on earth where a single gunshot fired in anger that would make headlines.

There is a worldwide blindness to traffic deaths. We have just accepted that this is how many people die. So if something more interesting happens elsewhere, the t-boned accountant on the way to Walmart just gets dropped.

So there are a number of factors that influence what makes the news or not. The list goes on.

I would also say that media coverage is not prescriptive for who you should feel empathy for. We cannot all feel all the tragedies on this planet at once. We’d go mad. You pick and choose as a defense mechanism. So if you don’t feel that much empathy for these national guardsmen, I kind of get it. If you don’t like how much media coverage it’s getting, I can definitely understand that. The problem is just that when you say this out loud you open yourself up to criticism, like: you don’t feel for the people who died while sworn to defend your freedom! What about children and nurses? That’s just whataboutism! Etc. So I would suggest you follow your own heart and change your media consumption when it bothers you. Or you’ll end up in a culture war debate about whose lives matter more.

You don’t show him the stupidity of his ways by sleeping with that lady. You either find a way to confront him about that. Or you unattach yourself from this toxic person by finding other, better friends. Frankly, I would give him a piece of my mind and then find other friends anyway.

I don’t think I’m leaning too far out this window when I say: no, there isn’t an optimal size. It depends on so many factors. How many people? Is this urban or rural? What’s there neighborhood like? Facilities, public transport, doctors, grocery stores, etc.? What’s the crime rate like? How long is the commute to work? People have different priorities and make different choices as a result.

I think the telephone sort of fits. It’s attributed to Bell but that’s mainly because he wiggled his way into a US patent before his competition. The telephone has many fathers though: Bourseul, Manzetti, Reis - just to name three. The latter is also the father of the word telephone but died before it took off. There were many engineers tinkering so if Bell hadn’t taken the crown, another person would have done it.

Bonus answer: penicillin. Alexander Flemming. A lucky, accidental discovery. If mold hadn’t gotten sloppily into his cultures we might all have died of the plague or something nice like that.

Trusting judges is not uniquely American. You’ll find similar processes on the continent across the channel. The hurdles of who can sue and under which circumstances may differ. The appointment of judges is often less politicized. I think the UK is the unique case here and I believe that’s because by and large there isn’t a written constitution, at the very least not in the same way as in the US or France or Poland. Supreme courts are there as a check on whether or not laws conform to constitutional values and have the power to overrule a legislature when it passes laws that don’t. It’s not an “upper hand” deal, it’s checks and balances.

The American legal system is not great. I don’t know the details of the case you mentioned. One bad decision doesn’t mean the whole system needs to be abolished. If that were so I’d like to have a word with the UK’s highest court on what constitutes a woman.