FriendOfDeSoto

I think the future will surprise us with a new method of digital obfuscation other than bitcoin et al. Crypto is a bit tainted. We can only look at the tools we have available today to make a guess about the future. My belief is that we will come up with something new, something else that isn't as speculative and volatile. People don't want their bribes to be devalued because some people found their long forgotten hard drives with crypto wallets and eff up the exchange rate.

Maybe barter is the wrong word in this instance. I mean rudimentary, handshake trade within an equally rudimentary community. Farmer A has wheat, hunter B shot two deer. A agrees to give half a blurb of wheat to B for 2 blorbs worth of prime venison. Both make it through the winter. That's what I meant.

I'm not Scandinavian or live there, I think they are possibly the most cashless countries today. I'm in Japan where we just moved away from fax machines for banking and cash is very much alive and well. So I don't have any specific experience to share, just general thoughts.

how much longer until they take cash and browser-based banking from us?

I would question the framing here. I don't think "the man" will come in and "take it from us." The move towards digital money and online banking isn't so much prescribed by a dark cabal than it is driven by convenience. If the majority of people didn't find anything useful about it, they would not adapt these things like tap to pay or online banking.

Bartering wasn't made immediately illegal when currency came in. Currency was made to make bartering easier and more fairly divisible. Things changed at a glacial pace to get to our modern economy.

Banks and credit unions do have an incentive to get you to do your banking online. They can close all their locations except for ATMs and get you to do your in-person interactions with a central video call center. That saves them labor costs and they like that.

And security agencies and the revenue service like people spending digital, traceable money. It cuts out the gray area where under the table shenanigans take place.

As far as a push to online banking is concerned, there are a few factors that overlap. The aforementioned labor cost issue for the banks. A lack of legislation or regulations to provide banking that is accessible to preferably all people online. And then there is competing regulations to make it safe for people to use. And with that you run into the issue that you need the two biggest mobile OS's to get you access via the web or the app that does all. This is where we need to lobby our political leaders and the stance should be: don't leave grandma in the lurch. We have more old people than young ones in most western countries, old people vote in higher numbers, let's frame a way to preserve online banking in the most privacy-friendly manner around how an octogenarian should be able to use it safely. I think this is how you cover most bases with a good chance of success, even in the pre-authoritarian US. That should include browser-based banking and authentication means that don't only depend on Google and Apple.

As far as cash or concerned there will come a point where governments and central banks just throw their hands in the air and say: it's too expensive to keep printing and then maintaining the money in physical form. That's it, we go digital, damn a possible apocalypse and the fact that when we do we will be absolutely hosed when that happens. And, realistically, even if we retained physical money during the apocalypse, the economy would still collapse. Wars have shown us that money is quickly replaced by barter of cigarettes, booze, and other desirable or necessary goods. So you're "only" left with the privacy and liberty considerations to spend cash without anyone keeping a constant ledger. And I fear they will be drowned out by "hey, we can stamp out all drug trafficking" promises. Not realizing that like most rivers finding the sea most drug traffic participants will find a way in the new digital only system as well. And that gives me hope. I think we will see physical cash disappear this century. But at the same pace, people will find ways to avoid being tracked.

What can you do? Keeping your fingers crossed, become politically engaged with parties who want to protect old people in an online banking world, and vote for politicians who want to preserve cash. Just know that your best funded co campaigners will be the mob and tax dodgers.

Wortfindungseuphorie.

That's not universally true. Necrophiles may be past that, according to preference.

The study isn't about how good so-called AI is at detecting cancer. The study is about how these doctors lose the ability to spot cancer after having delegated the spotting part of their difficult jobs to a model. They looked at the numbers before the introduction, while using it, and then when they took this assistance away. This study can say something about these doctors' behavior. I don't think it proves so-called AI is shit at it. It's more about how humans get lazy. Roughly six generations ago people could recite poetry from memory, know the dates of historical importance, and remember 50 phone numbers. Now we're like eff that I got those in my phone plus Wikipedia access. It's more like that.

Kids are probably old enough to get it. I would just think that you will be loading a shotgun that's going to shoot you in the face down the line. Either the ladies will get in each other's hair or, worse, they'll team up against you. I think your girlfriend is either insane or not entirely honest when she says she would be fine with your arrangement. I would sooner suggest you look for a place closeby. I'm guessing the 15yo is eye rolling you hard and the 13yo will soon not care about you either. You've carried them through the divorce rough spot with your unique living arrangement. Take a bow and let it go. Provide a better environment for your new relationship.

But everyone deserves a threat and if you live in the USA, then tip is required...

That typo is more apt than intended.

but nobody is discussing this initiative

Well, go ahead. Discuss it. I don't know what it is.

We are just asking old questions here. The printing press, novels, and pamphlets were the end of truth! We struggled, many people died, but life moved on. Then newspapers, more death, radio, world wars. Television, photoshop, the internet - fewer deaths in between but still. And life moved on.

Every new medium brought a phase of uncertainty (and possible carnage). That's where we are right now. Every time we think "this is the worst EVER." Until the next thing comes around. We will figure out the slop tsunami as well. I think fewer people will die than during the reformation.

Some people will successfully bend truth to generated video or whatever. But in the end, most will not succeed. Because we get wiser at spotting the bullshit. Q Anon showed us the learning isn't a linear development; it follows more of a two steps forward, one step back pattern.

Not everything but a lot. The short answer is cost. This will be long and simplified simultaneously:

Ever since the latter half of the last century companies have really loved one way to reduce cost in manufacturing. And that's labor. Go to a place where the cost of living is low and work those people to the bone for a pittance.

After WW2 a lot of stuff was made in Japan, then in South Korea and Taiwan, and then China. We have since moved on to places like Vietnam, Myanmar (when politically palatable), and India. All of these stories are different and the same. Japan's industrial heartland was bombed to smithereens and had to be rebuilt, top of the line. People needed jobs, those people were good at it too, and manufacturing jobs went there. The economy grew, wages grew with them, and it became too costly again. Enter South Korea, after successfully democratizing in the 80s (I think). They looked at what Japan had done and did a version of that. The economy grew, wages along with it, and it also became too expensive. Enter the People's Republic of China in the 90s, ready to blend communist political power with Manchester red capitalism. A billion people who need jobs. So they looked at what the other so-called tiger states had done and did a version of their own. The economy grew, wages grew with it, and they are teetering on the edge of being to expensive again. But their sheer size, both geographically and inhabitants-wise, keeps them in the game longer. Because the policies the communists implemented to grow and steer the economy are quite unique and perhaps the lack of having to explain everything (i.e. democratic oversight) puts them in quite a strong position. And over the last 30 years anybody who is somebody has gone to China. Big market to sell goods to, big labor force to make stuff, somebody else's rivers to pollute. It was so tempting a deal that both the US and Europe blindly became very dependent on China. Certain base chemicals, e.g. for medicine, were almost exclusively produced there. I think there world's entire canned mandarin industry is one village in the middle of nowhere. It takes time to change this. 47 is trying to do it the impulsive, not so thought through way (tariffs). But he may yet learn that you cannot make an iPhone in the States for the price suicidal youths put it together in Shenzhen. At the heart is always cost. Labor is expensive in Ohio, cheap in Guangdong. Slightly cheaper in greater Hanoi. If we could just stop the genocide and coups, Myanmar. India has a harder time catching up because - at least for the time being - there is democratic oversight. But the gravy train will move on. Subsaharan Africa will be the next big thing. Capitalism.

Have you ever noticed the difference in screen quality before? Did you ever watch a YT video on something slightly better than a cathode ray monitor and thought to yourself: "hmm, this is shit."? If so, don't cheap out on the tablet. Maybe a used iPad might even be ideal. I'm leaning Apple here because Android tablet screens tend to be worse on average and there will be fewer good ones on the resale market.

If you don't want a big TV, how about a smaller one that you can cast content to? Just as another suggestion because other folks have already suggested laptops.

As you get older, your eyes turn to shit and most of this won't matter that much. So you're right to be cautious on the spending.

I proudly watch movies on my phone. If I don't want to watch Paw Patrol or Frozen it's the only way to get some not-made-for-kids content in. And I can take it to the toilet and continue watching. And I don't mean porn, just to clarify. Sure, as the cinematic experience goes, it isn't what Christopher Nolan had in mind but shit happens. It's that or nothing.