Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ceejayoz's commentslogin

> AI-generated content should have the same amount of copyright as prompt texts.

That's about right currently.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-de...

"Plaintiff Stephen Thaler had appealed to the justices after lower courts upheld a U.S. Copyright Office decision that the AI-crafted visual art at issue in the case was ineligible for copyright protection because it did not have a human creator."


Why would the retirees want to be put back to work?

Why would the students want to have to do two full-time tasks at once?

Why would the homemakers want to add another full-time task?

Why would the people with cancer want to have to work from their hospital bed?

There's more to life than work. Get a hobby! Hope and purpose doesn't have to come from menial labor.


Money, money, money, and money. We need it to survive. Until people's basic needs are taken care of for them, they need to do what they can to live.

Humans are older than money, so evidently we don't need it to survive, but there is more to existence than mere survival. I agree that people's basic needs to be taken care of, but I think that is an issue that needs to happen because of automation. It needs to happen because it is simply the right thing to do. I would go as fas as saying It shouldn't just be basic needs. Society should be aiming to provide the entire hierarchy of needs for everyone.

I think having employment delivers some of the higher needs to a subset of people, but it is a privileged few. A huge number work just to provide the basic needs. Advocating using the advances in automation to raise everybody up is what we need. Instead we seem to be maintaining a system that gives a few what we want and the rest of us are too busy with the survival part to influence that change.


> Society should be aiming to provide the entire hierarchy of needs for everyone.

I don’t know. Society should provide the framework within which people can achieve their needs (and wants), but not the needs and wants themselves directly.

Otherwise you put an artificial cap on human growth and inefficient allocation of resources.


Why not simply pay the homemakers? Why is it so important that everyone produce economic output at the widget factory?

Allow me to translate into a language you can understand: The people who are all “unemployed” are actually performing valuable services like maintaining the future labor pool, learning how to become skilled workers, and so on. These people should not have a second job, they should be paid for the valuable services they’re providing.


IMO, basic income for parents is absolutely a policy that Japan should enact.

And the question of how much the payment should be has a straightforward answer: adjust until the birth rate reaches replacement.

If the payment ends up high enough that some mothers or fathers opt to leave the labor force to focus on raising their kids, then so be it; that's probably healthier for society in the long term.

It would be expensive, yes, but cheaper than the alternatives. And anyway, Japan's stagnant economy would likely benefit from the boost to consumer demand.


Sounds good. You're welcome to pay those people as much as you like. No one is stopping you.


You didn't answer the question, you answered a different question: "why would someone want to work, just in general?" The question that was posed was, why would someone who has already chosen to retire, or who is already fully occupied, or who is sick, want to work?

Again, we're talking about retirees, homemakers, college students, disabled, etc. here.

Switzerland has a population larger than all but ~11 US states.

It's got 9m people. The US has 30x the people and 250x the space. It's not comparable.

So why do we struggle to get the infrastructure to work in dense urban areas still? Or even just “not Wyoming”?

Switzerland and California have the same population density. Why can’t CA build high speed rail?


Just for the information Switzerland neither does ;)

CA’s high speed rail isn’t high speed by European standards and it looks on the way to cancelation or significant curtailment. We can’t even manage what y’all would consider slow rail.

I don't know but Swiss isn't the only train system that works but also Spain, Italy, France. Poland has a growing better train system . The swiss system has it's advantages but it is also very expensive.

It might also worth it to check them out


I’ve ridden on several.

“Others do it even better and cheaper” makes the US failure to build and maintain infrastructure like this even sadder.


What is this supposed to imply? us states are also a poor representation of humanity. This matters a great deal: switzerland is notoriously ethnically homogenous and unable to get along with anyone. Life on easy mode!

It implies that Switzerland is by no means so tiny their lessons learned can't apply to other multi-million human sized regions.

Switzerland gets along with others just fine, to the point where Italy and France used to handle their air defense on the weekends (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_702).

> The Swiss Air Force did not respond because the incident occurred outside normal office hours; a Swiss Air Force spokesman stated: "Switzerland cannot intervene because its airbases are closed at night and on the weekend. It's a question of budget and staffing." Switzerland relies on neighboring countries to police its airspace outside of regular business hours; the French and Italian Air Forces have permission to escort suspicious flights into Swiss airspace, but do not have authority to shoot down an aircraft over Switzerland.


Try 500 mil and you'll see china is the only interesting sample.

If the swiss were able to get along with others, they wouldn't have such a reputation as racist nazis


China is, as the EU (450M), US (340M), and Switzerland are, broken into smaller subunits for local and regional government.

There's only two countries with over 500 million people and they're complete freak outliers.

"unable to get along with anyone" is an interesting claim given that the last armed conflict in Switzerland was in 1847 (Sonderbund War).

you going for the cherry-picked-but-functionally-meaningless statistic of the week award?

I'm going for the "Switzerland isn't a little village of 50 people, we can learn lessons from them just fine" award.

Every large country breaks things up into small chunks. No one says Vermont can't handle a school system just because it's small.


I have a gentle rule, which is "if you can do it in one place, it is probably possible to do it in a second". The Swiss are not a separate species.

There are a lot of things you can do in a rich, tiny, homogenous country that you can't do in a enormous, diverse country.

If my house were a country, I'd be in the top 0.1% of household internet speeds compared to other countries. Obviously everyone should be just like me!


> There are a lot of things you can do in a rich, tiny, homogenous country that you can't do in a enormous, diverse country.

The US is a large collection of a whole bunch of rich (by global standards), tiny, fairly homogenous areas. We manage roads and schools at state, county, and local levels; we could do municipal broadband.


The difficulties of American internet speeds have little to do with the total size of the country, but how far individual families are from each other. Spain is roughly the size of Texas, and Spain has a higher population, but you need a lot less fiber to each home, because metro areas are so much denser, and therefore it's so much easier to lay the fiber.

As usual, blame the suburbs, which make all kinds of infrastructure quite a bit more expensive per capita.


But the US has long lagged behind in even dense areas. It's more than just the distribution.

Right. It’s things like Baltimore (when I lived there) requiring that high speed internet had to roll out in poor areas first, before it could go into the rich neighborhoods.

But this was the early 2000s and the internet was still “new”. Only the richer areas cared and were willing to pay the price. Letting them have first (or even equal!) access would have made it easier to fund the rollout in low income areas.


Huge swaths of our densest metro areas, in our largest cities, do not have any fiber option, just one cable provider.

The NEC, which is the only area of the US that really has any density to speak of, does have pretty good fiber penetration.

https://www.reviews.org/app/uploads/2024/11/Verizon-Fios-cov...


> There are a lot of things you can do in a rich, tiny, homogenous country that you can't do in an enormous, diverse country.

US states are little islands entirely capable of doing things like building infrastructure. There is no excuse for our states and their lack of movement, certainly not “the entire country is just tooooo big. whoa is us.” nonsense.


Yes, that's true for population.

But all except 9 US states are larger in geographic area and only 5 have a higher population density.

Those are pretty salient statistics when you're talking about infrastructure that links houses.


Does New York have great home fiber infrastructure?

Rich is a key attribute here. Tiny, not really. The key is dense. That makes terrestrial connections cheaper. A country with the population of the US and the richness and density of Switzerland would be just as capable of building out high speed internet connections. It would have ~38x the population of Switzerland, cost ~38x more to wire, and have ~38x the resources with which to do it.

Incidentally, the northeast of the US has a similar or greater population density as Switzerland and is pretty rich. That area, at least, should be as capable of this sort of thing. Doing it for, say, everybody in Alaska would be a bit tougher.

I don't know what diversity has to do with anything here. As far as I've seen, people from all sorts of different places and cultures seem to like high speed internet about equally well.


Infrastructure is laughable in northeast. And no, we do not have competition here in NJ. Yay "free market"

>homogenous country

Tell me you know nothing about Switzerland without telling me you know nothing about Switzerland. Try asking a German Swiss what they think about a French Swiss or either about the Romansch.


So one would think.

And yet, living in Switzerland after the UK involved one after another discovery of how well-ordered and -run a country could be. And then moving to Germany was like stepping back even further behind my memories of the UK.

I'm sure you could find examples of countries that do specific things as well as Switzerland; but I'm not aware of many places that do almost everything so excellently. (Maybe Japan, in many respects, but I lack sufficient direct experience to adequately judge.)


I don't doubt there are differences.

I doubt they're insurmountable. Again, because the Swiss aren't some genetically superior subspecies. Culture can be changed.

I see Americans talk about how impossible universal healthcare is as if the rest of the developed world hasn't largely figured it out.


Nothing is insurmountable; however each one of us must play within the practical constraints of our local geographies (political, social, financial and physical). The parent comment probably means that Switzerland is in a positive on all axes unlike the rest of the world.

It’s politics. Boil most things down and the technical is inconsequential when compared to the politics.

Look at the political system of Switzerland and you will see a radically different setup.

And I think that’s the horse. The rest is cart. Yes they are rich but why? Yes they are relatively stable socially but why? Decentralised Canton government structure + direct democracy (referendums all the time for things that matter). That, I think, is why all the rest.


I think there's more to it than that.

From a philosophical perspective, I love the cantonal/direct democracy model. But it's supported by a strong culture of awareness of current affairs, and involvement in the political process. (Of course, these two aspects are likely strongly synergistic.)

However, I'm not sure this unique political structure explains the trains running on time, the sensible choices made about the internet structure (per the article), the top-of-the-world healthcare system, the Swiss cheese science institute, or many other aspects of the broader country. It may partly explain the routinely excellent government bureaucracy (say that with a straight face anywhere else!), the convenient and reliable local public transport options, and the local police being well-resourced to the point of apparent boredom.


Heh, you were walking right up to my viewpoint and then turned away. A parliamentary democracy with proportional representation has way more influence IMO, and you'll find another couple of relatively well-run countries that work like that.

For me, this is the point of the article. People fought and the best decision was the result. And I suspect there's a fundamental cultural difference that makes the fight much less fair in America.

Been an American my entire life. 45+ years. I've never heard a single person say that universal healthcare is "impossible".

I'm an American and I've heard it often, usually with a bunch of strange excuses. We're too big, we're too diverse, there's too many states, and on. None of those actually make very much sense, but I've heard it all for why universal healthcare could never work in the US.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-not...

> President Donald Trump on Wednesday said it’s “not possible” for the federal government to fund Medicare, Medicaid and child care costs, arguing that it should be up to the states to “take care” of those programs while the federal government focuses on military spending.


I guess I'm pretty confused on what your point is here?

Universal Healthcare would be a new program in the US that would see a drastic tax increase, in that our healthcare spending currently going to insurance companies would instead go to a new federal agency. The amount of money companies and citizens spend on it may or may not also increase, but your quote has basically nothing to do with that.


That’s sleight of hand. “Ooooh! A tax increase! Scary!”

If I can pay $100 in tax to save $200 in premiums and copays, that’s a win. The US is an extreme outlier in healthcare spend.


We must live on opposite sides of US cause I’ve never heard anyone say that it is possible (except few politicans who thought it may be a good way to win an election but also knew that it was not possible and gave up once they got elected)

> I'm not aware of many places that do almost everything so excellently

Probably Singapore, which is sometimes described as the Switzerland of Asia anyway. 10 Gb symmetric fibre is broadly available at around SGD $50/month (about 35 EUR).


This is not to say that it isn't well run, but I think it would be fair to mention that Singapore is one of the most densely populated countries on Earth (#3 overall; #1 among countries with population >1 million.)

Separately, I am not totally sure just how widely deployed FTTH is in Switzerland. Here in Zürich it's everywhere, but zooming in on some rural place on init7's map tells quite a different story (perhaps not surprisingly).

https://ftth.init7.net


Cool.

Who staffs your stores when everyone moves away? Who mows the lawn? Who builds the houses?


Andrew Johnson was the first US President to be impeached.

Clinton too, then Trump twice.


Didn't go through. None of them were removed from office.

> None of them were removed from office.

Correct. But that's not because they weren't impeached.

Impeachment is part of the process; three presidents have been impeached, Trump twice. Then comes the trial, and conviction/acquittal.


“First, your return to shore was not part of our negotiations nor our agreement, so I must do nothing. And secondly, you must be a pirate for the Pirate's Code to apply, and you're not. And thirdly, the Code is more what you'd call guidelines than actual rules.”

Turns out that last bit is how the US was setup. Oops.


> France and Japan never distanced themselves from USA here.

Trump sure seems to think France did.

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/31/trump-attacks-uk-france-x-po...

"President Donald Trump on Tuesday warned the U.K. and France that the U.S. “won’t be there to help you anymore,” as he vented his frustration over the close allies’ refusal to join military action against Iran."


> add a supreme leader above the president, similar to what Iran or Russia or China is doing

This is trivially debunked.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_Russia


> Are you saying democrats didn't vote for Kamala since Kamala didn't call Trump voters evil?

Dems were disillusioned by the Biden administration's lack of meaningful effort to nail the previous administration's criminals to the wall. Merrick Garland was an absolute failure.

Add in things like cozying up to the Cheneys, and the incorrect assumption Trump II would be similar to Trump I.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: