Mtinie

> This seems like it could also lead to absurd situations. If a device contained both, would customs pretend it was simultaneously 100% made out of copper and 100% made out of steel and apply both tariffs?

Yes, because it benefits the “here’s how much extra revenue our copper tariffs generate in 2025” sound bites for the Administration to tout (even if they are fabricated numbers based on nonsensical assumptions.)

I’m genuinely interested in which “purity tests” you are referring to. I’m all for bi-partisan ridicule if it’s warranted.

If I'm not directly impacted by someones' use of PPE, then that's their business even if I think it is an overreaction or performative. I've injured myself while doing "simple" operations before when a bolt or screw unexpectedly failed, so it may not be as performative as it appears.

On the other hand, if I'm working with someone in a professional capacity and they are delaying our work because they are acting in an anxious manner about safety, then I'll take time to talk through why I see their actions as counter-productive and then we can discuss how to be safe and efficient.

Quite possibly.

In my experience, the people who make unsolicited comments about others’ risk mitigations have incorrectly learned that safety precautions indicate weakness or inexperience, when experience teaches the opposite.

Seasoned professionals know that tools and environments don’t care about your skill level. A tool will injure anyone who doesn’t respect its inherent dangers.

The mockery typically comes from those who’ve either been lucky so far or selectively absorbed workplace cultures that prioritize appearing tough over staying whole.

> Just like we will never have fully self-driving cars, we likely won't have fully human quality coders.

“Never is a long time...and none of us lives to see its length.” Elizabeth Yates, A Place for Peter (Mountain Born, #3)

“Never is an awfully long time.” J.M. Barrie, Peter Pan

Common sense takes time to sink in.

It could be lethal if a guild member attempted to share secrets or sell methods to a competitive guild. An example:

"In 1754 the State Inquisitors of Venice learned that a worker at Daniele Miotti's factory had fled abroad with a copy of his master's books. Fearing that he would divulge secrets—especially in Bohemia, where there were important glass factories—they ordered his death."

Source: Zecchin, P., (2025) “Una condanna a morte di dubbia utilità: Sarebbe stato molto grave, per i vetrai muranesi, se il seicentesco ricettario Miotti fosse caduto nelle mani dei Boemi?”, Journal of Glass Studies 66: 7. doi: https://doi.org/10.3998/jgs.6939

Just how widespread it was for violent and lethal actions to be carried out in pursuit of maintaining guild secrecy, the evidence is murky.

I agree with you that the possibility of egalitarian care for low costs is becoming very likely.

I’m cynical enough to recognize the price will just go up even if the service overhead is pennies on the dollar.

> No, so what.

Because it promotes itself as a platform to learn fluency. That’s why it’s important to recognize its limitations.

I’ve lived in Loudoun County for twenty-four years, so I’ve seen much of the development firsthand. The data center expansion, particularly in Ashburn and Sterling, has been amazing to watch.

However, I’m puzzled by this portion of your comment: ‘…has seen tremendous development thanks to data center expansion.’

The major residential growth in Ashburn, Broadlands, Sterling, Lansdowne, and surrounding areas significantly predates the data center boom. These communities were already experiencing rapid expansion and large influxes of new residents well before the data center industry took off here.

The pricing seems reasonable for a SOTA class model that needs to be commercially viable or it dies.

Is this a shareable ruleset? I would completely understand if not but I’m interested in learning new ways to interact with my tools.

I’m reasonably sure that most of the national-level news media companies have been owned by millionaires (and now billionaires) for the last century. William Randolph Hearst, E.W. Scripps, the Ochs-Sulzberger family, Raoul H. Fleischmann, Cyrus H. K. Curtis are a few of the prominent wealthy owners of nationally-distributed news outlets and publications in 1925. Back farther to the Civil War you find more “independent” publications but it’s a challenge to determine which of them were privately owned by individuals of considerable wealth vs. those owned by their publishers who may or may not have been wealthy.

For a current breakdown, see: Index of News Media Ownership: https://futureofmedia.hsites.harvard.edu/index-us-mainstream...

Authoritarianism is much easier to implement in a pervasive surveillance environment, digital or otherwise. Unfortunate for all of us, even those who think they are immune.

Political persuasion as an aside, isn’t the premise of the article itself functionally correct? Recalls should be used to recall politicians who endanger the citizens, not as a “do over” when the election results don’t match a particular ideology.

That none of the candidates targeted were successfully recalled suggests the proponents of the recall overstated or overstepped their understanding of the electorate’s desires to see change.

UUDDLRLRBASlSt

I have a hunch I’ll somehow remember the Konami Code well after I’ve forgotten everything else.

Excellent. That’s what we should be doing, with or without AI. It’s hard, but it’s critical.

Considering that on paper these businesses all have employees serving as CISO, EVP-, SVP-, and many, many Directors of Security, I find it highly unlikely that the accumulated experience of the people and their teams results in decisions like this. It's hard to distinguish incompetence from malice in many situations but calling them "naive" seems to be indirectly excusing customer-hostile behavior.

It doesn't make any sense to me because it's expensive to make sure your company's services are secure, but it's also expensive to not be secure. Perhaps it's less expensive to not worry about it because the loss-of-customers impact on revenue are still under the cost of doing it right. If that's the case it's a sad state for all of us.

That does not help me understand why I should pay for this service. I personally have zero concern for why this service should make money beyond operating costs. “Why should I should pay for it” is the question I asked.

In my experience the problem it proposes to solve isn’t something I consider so problematic that a subscription would improve things. My experience may not be the norm, and that’s definitely a consideration I’m aware of. Still, I can’t see a reason to subscribe as such.

Are there people who don’t have clinical diagnoses of depression being subjected to electro convulsive therapies?

Addendum: I believe I’m close to figuring out what you are communicating but for me it’s not working.

I’m reasonably sure we’d agree that neurological conditions are complex and that labels only tell part of the story.

Experience has taught me that your assertion is from a privileged position. Congratulations for being closer to the neuro-populous side of the spectrum. Your experiences can only represent your unique case.

I can assure you that from my singular anecdotal experience that a diagnosis does not imbue economic and financial benefit.

One anecdotal observation does not fully tell the story.

Alternatively, society is broken.

An engine is an assembly of parts. When an engine breaks down it does so because it broke down. An engine does not exist without its cylinders, fuel system, gaskets, lubricants, etc.

I believe your analogy is flawed. Can you restate your first statement in any other way?

Not exactly what you are asking for but we’re moving closer to your vision of the future:

https://github.com/yurkagon/Doom-Nukem-CSS

Who knows. I have lots of siblings and my spouse does as well, so that’s nine vacuums accounted for. Add in both sets of parents and I’d have one left over to gift to someone who also needs one.

I’m not sure how to take your comment other than uncharitably so I’ll just concede that you obviously have smaller dust collection needs than I do.

That’s your responsibility. I did not state that it was 100% created by AI. You did, so back it up since you obviously know things the rest of us don’t.

Without proof I can only assume you 100% made up your argument.

Please help me understand why a subscription to your service should be a valuable addition to my monthly spend.

I buy extensively from Amazon across a number of product categories. My order history shows purchases as far back as 2005 (though I cannot be sure given I remember buying things in 1998 while in college, probably on a different account). During the intervening 20 years I can count on one hand the number of products I ordered which weren’t legitimate, matched my—admittedly moderate expectations for any commercial product—or included overhyped reviews.

I’d be interested in a service like yours if I could understand how the cost would cover itself in benefits.

It’s the rational option if someone is giving you something for less than it costs you and the moral implications of the action is minimal (at best).