1550
We live in the future!
(thelemmy.club)
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/9525207
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2026
1550 points (97.8% liked)
Programmer Humor
30364 readers
1114 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Because you have 2/4 general terms:
Cryptocurrency not Cryptography to disambiguate again
Cryptozoology? I KNEW IT WAS GONNA BE FUCKING BIGFOOT!!!
https://www.cdc.gov/cryptosporidium/
Thanks, new anxiety unlocked
Sorry, at this point the term "crypto" has been thoroughly claimed by the shysters.
Tales from the Crypt
"Rideshare" is also the least accurate term used to dodge regulations. It is just a taxi/cab. You are paying someone to get you from one place to another. They aren't sharing their ride, they were never going where you are going before you told them to.
Taxis/cabs are legal. Also, perhaps because of age, I tend to view taxis and cabs as phone numbers you call for a car to show up (or go to a taxi stand), whereas I see rideshare as reserve via an app.
I think ride share really just means a vehicle that is used not solely for commercial purposes
They are legal if you follow the regulations. The problem with the "rideshare" companies is that they don't. We should just call them "unregulated taxis" rather than pretending that they are a different service. I think just about every taxi company these days is on some app or another (often the same that call unregulated cabs in countries that actually got their shit together and banned the unregulated ones).
They literally changed the name of the company from UberCab to duck regulation.
It would have been cool if they'd renamed themselves "Calloway".
I'd like to point out this probably would have taken another 10-15 years to achieve had it not been for the disruption of said ridesharing apps.
Just because there's a inconvenience for consumers doesn't mean you make workers suffer instead of fixing the problem.
I'm assuming/ hoping you mean the taxi drivers when you say workers.
I empathize with anyone who's livelihood is affected by changes in society. But stagnating progress because someone somewhere will be negatively impacted only assures no progress will ever be made.
You can have progress without forcing people into starvation because "it's the system".
I mean we could build a better social safety net so this doesn't happen...
You telling me you think we should continue to endure a transportation system that is basically a monopoly, where the user has little transparency on what they get charged beforehand, where they can only use the service if they call or are lucky enough to be in a high traffic location, just so no one loses their job?
Cities have a medallion system to prevent congestion of taxis on the roads. If there was a problem, increasing the number of medallions and scheduling surge pricing (like NYC has done with all cars now) would have improved service.
Alternately, simply declaring Uber a taxi service and subject to employment laws would have fixed most everything.
I guess since flying is a hassle, I should buy a jet and land it in parking lots to make it convenient for consumers. So what if a few hundred die a year if tens of thousands have easier air travel.
So.. would NYC have done this if it wasn't influenced by the existence of Uber/Lyft?
Would the taxi companies that owned all the medallions have allowed this to happen if their existence wasn't threatened? Or would they lobby to stop this at all cost because it doesn't benefit them?
So hundreds are dying due to Uber?
If you need to make a bullshit theoretical to justify your stance, you might want to reconsider your stance.
If flying cars were possible and if benefited consumers, it should definitely be adopted and regulated properly like any other service.
No taxi lobby stopped Uber.
There is a sexual assault every 8 minutes caused by an Uber driver.
Googling says for example Uber has 400 assaults in San Francisco and the taxi industry had 14.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/07/us/uber-driver-murder-trial.html#%3A%7E%3Atext=Former+Uber+Driver+Pleads+Guilty%2CU.S.
I can't find any examples of taxi drivers murdering their passengers. All news is about taxi drivers being murdered by their customers.
Lmao as if the cab companies weren't a cartel making their own regulations.
I use a local cab company. They smartened up after getting crushed by uber in the first couple years of their existence. Now they have an app that’s similar to uber, but I just call and use the web link that shows me where the car is.
It’s literally the same service, but I have to give my info to Uber’s app to get it.
shouldnt 4 also include AI generated images?
Better term would probably be generative AI to also cover music, video and my grandmother's soul.
Llms generate those afaik
No, those are generally diffusion models, not large language models. Language models generate text.