No, they do generate that outrage, you've just become used to ignoring it.

Besides, outrage is mostly a response to change, or seeing something in the news (a major outrage driver). If there's no news item to hang it on the outrage just sort of sits there uselessly.

There's a lot of outrage to go round. An entire US administration devoted to maximising gross national outrage will do that.

The class commentary affects why you're hearing about it, not what the baseline level of outrage is.

Also, we are mostly too young to have experienced the outrage generated by industrial farming, industrialized manufacturing etc., while the outrage generated by AI is right here, right now.

Remember all those recent stories about "AI is really good at hacking now"?

Meanwhile SEGA's arcade machines have been offline for days: https://www.techpowerup.com/354714/sega-network-hack-keeps-j... and fanfiction writing site AO3 is down for two weeks so far. Then there's the freezer hacks, one of which impacted the French blood service.

It's been a long time since I read COMP.RISKS (and indeed it's no longer published) but this feels like an unusually high level of incidents.

.. to the same grid. If you're lucky they're to different substations.

The number of people who had "independent" fiber connections which were routed through the same channel and destroyed by the same backhoe is so high it's a meme among sysadmins.

The problem with trying to have two grids is that if anyone ever connects them together, now they're one grid with a weak link in it.

See Japan (2) and the US (3).

DC links are now feasible for these situations, and don't have certain failure properties of AC grids (synchronization/frequency/phase).

Now they're one grid with a controllable weak link. They might solve the all-or-nothing interconnection problem of AC grids, but they can still cascade failures - and they will, if one goes down and everyone switches to the other.

The problem is that making a business out of "less" is hard. Especially when dealing with the hellscape that is "enterprise sales". Both the marketing people and the customer love piling on additional features!

Two decades ago I was at a startup that moved from a Linux email solution to a Microsoft one. Why? For the CEO's blackberry and calendar integration.

There are loads of FOSS email solutions and providers. There are fewer "email+calendar" providers, and there are even fewer "email+calendar+desktop logon SSO" providers.

And even fewer that let you see that visio presentation someone tried sharing with you over teams

It's a pain to administer.

Not nearly as much pain as those who stand to benefit from outsourcing mail services would like you to believe.

I have administered both Exim and Exchange and would very much like not to do so again. Especially since in the time since then the number of requirements for effective delivery and antispam has only gone up.

Paying employees -> bad. Paying corporations -> good.

As if this isn't solvable with automation.

People get really, really mad if wages don't go up either.

Inflation targeting is an awkward compromise involving keeping unemployment up to avoid wage pressure. Asking for nominal pricing to go down is even more miserable. Even before accounting for the war consuming a huge area of the oil producing world.

Edit: while I'm here, some historical view from the UK https://www.parkers.co.uk/50-anniversary/costs-of-driving/

There's lots of room for wages to grow faster than prices. All you have to do is force high margin businesses to reduce their profits. Every supply chain has at least one of those. Oil is basically the best case scenario where a couple big suppliers dominate, so if you target them you can recover most of the inefficiency.

And the compromise only exists if all of a company's earnings are either reinvested or given away to workers, which is almost never true in capitalism. Eliminating shareholders would instantly make everything cheaper.

Even the part going to labor is very unequally distributed. If we paid executives less and everyone else more the median wage would go up, no other changes needed.

From what I've read, more of the profits were fed back to workers before stock buybacks made legal. Now they can indirectly feed excess profits to shareholders by artificially boosting the stock price.

It doesn't artificially boost the stock price. There is a fixed amount of stock. If you buyback some, then the remaining stock becomes worth more.

If there is an issue of new stock at whatever valuation, it dilutes the pool and makes each stock worth less, but often that influx of cash is to chase an opportunity that can make the stock paradoxically go up.

Stock buybacks show a stale industry or lack of creativity in leadership and shareholders should vote accordingly.

Shareholders are also another voter class (pensioners).

The immersion fluid has to be non conductive and non corrosive. Hence the choice of oil (flammable) or weird fluorocarbons.

> if you don’t personally have a Mac, you should not be making Mac builds of your software

Apple seem to believe this extremely strongly and keep finding new ways to prevent you doing it.

I basically agree, and at work we have a Jenkins master + cluster of build machines. But this does incur substantial sysadmin overhead even if we're using Ansible and all the Windows ones are VMs. (Mac, again, hates being either virtualized or stuck in a rack, and will occasionally insist on someone using the physical display and keyboard on the actual machine to perform updates)

Rounding error compared to the number of Excel users.