

deleted by creator


deleted by creator


If I recall correctly, the amount came from a national study of the technical debt, if you will. For example, my city is a fairly large city, more than a million people, and it’s using pipes that are over 100 years old, so that’s probably not good, right?
Its a typical situation.
I do agree, we should tax the rich. Even if we magically had the funding yesterday, there are an astonishing number of complexities involved in fixing the aging infrastructure, not the least of which is the zero downtime tolerance.


https://www.waterloop.org/a-2-trillion-wake-up-call-for-drinking-water/
This is just the first search response, there are probably better ones. I leave that as an exercise for the reader.
9/27/2004


That’s not exactly accurate. The problem is that everything in infrastructure was working just fine, and so they figured they could make it more efficient by reducing the staff. And to do that, they put everything online, so it was controllable by fewer people. And they kept doing that year after year. The funding went down and down and down, and there are literal, uh, literal policies that keep them from switching to better stuff. So it’s much more complex than the way you draw it.
For example, US water infrastructure would need $2.1 trillion or something around that amount to actually become current and fully repaired.
Where exactly would that come from? It’s not an easy answer. It’s a much more complex problem. That’s all I’m saying.


Yes and no.
Yes it’s annoying, but fuck bots and AI.
Grain of salt may be required though. I use noscript almost everywhere.


The funniest thing about this is that there’s no way a human can keep up with this increase in cybersecurity flaws and vulnerabilities that are being discovered, but at the same time, there is no parity between cybersecurity defense and attack.
Regardless of efforts, we’re still going to be in a losing battle for quite a while.


There are literally thousands of water infrastructure facilities that are on Shodan now. I take your meaning, but it’s a very bad thing.


China is taking Taiwan. Probably in 28.
Posted blur wave memes FOR THE GLORY OF THE EMPIRE


Temu shitler is chief of staff. Great.


How can you tell the difference between a plumber and a chemist?
The way they pronounce unionized.
Give it a few months. Altman will have us using shit like this again.


I don’t know what their plans are, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they tried to buy all of it indefinitely.
It seems clear to me that they are betting on that they will not have to buy all of it indefinitely, and they will reach singularity before the Bill comes due. I don’t think that’ll happen, but I do think until the bubble pops, we’re gonna be kind of fucked on pricing.


I don’t know the UK, but China is definitely targeting our infrastructure in the U.S, and there is enough PLC hardware online on shodan, that it will be easy for them. I would be surprised if it’s all that much different in the UK, but who knows, maybe they’re not expecting the same kind of attack. Regardless, that kind of resilience promotion is only responsible.
Wish we had that here.
Oh, that and also there’s probably a revolution/civil war coming


Exactly, and that’s why they fucked the ram priced before they kicked into high gear, to repress us


That was always the plan


That was, in the end, an act of class solidarity. You did good by hundreds of people.
This is also a reminder to everyone: don’t trust management, get it in writing!
(Not trying to rub salt with that reminder, I promise)
First, I apologize for sounding dismissive. That wasn’t the intent.
Honestly, given the obvious low effort of your reply and the low quality of the content of your reply, I am not inclined to acquiesce to this request. Try harder.
For example, if you were to list specifically why it is “biased AF” and give a detailed analysis instead of just throwing words around. I might respect your viewpoint or opinion, as it is I do not.
I didn’t come here seeking to prove anything, and if that’s what you want, you can do it on your own time.
Also, you response is too abrasive to elicit the action you request.
Actually, I even question the motives behind your words, so perhaps you can make those clear as well.
Please note, the link to the original report is within the source you dismissed.