dumbo-octopus

All I said is moving parts have drawbacks. That’s true. Then a million people kept on the thread to try to claim otherwise, yourself included. Now you’re resorting to 4chan style comebacks, so that’s fun.

Indeed we shouldn’t have hinges or locks because moving parts have drawbacks, in contexts where that matters. For instance portals that don’t need a door at all, or walls that don’t need to open. Would you argue that every open passageway should have a door blocking it, and every wall should have hinges installed? No, that’s ridiculous. It’s equally ridiculous to get this angry about the simple fact that fixed awnings have upsides, and depending on the context they might be a better choice than retractable ones.

Connected to a gear that needs oil, a chain that needs oil and can rust, or a rope that withers. Being overly dismissive of failure modes isn’t a good look. I don’t claim that fixed awnings are God’s gift to humanity, just that they don’t have some of the drawbacks associated with moving parts. The amount of emotional reaction I’ve received to that completely factual statement is frankly ridiculous.

You forgot the actuator.

What is your point in stating that public housing uses them? (aka the government buys them).

No clue why this turned into a huge debate. I don’t have a dog in this fight, all I’m saying is that america has retractable awnings, they have some downsides, and a government (or a “low class” individual) buying something doesn’t convince me it’s a good investment.

The parent…? Who pays for public housing? And what relevance would the weather otherwise have..?

A government paying for a thing does not in any way imply that the thing is a good use of money. How many decades of fabric replacements could you get from the savings of bolting on a simple metal frame as compared to an elaborate electromechanically actuated arm mechanism?

We have them in america too. But every moving part comes with inflated costs for both acquisition and ongoing maintenance.

Can you name another time the software team has lagged so far behind the hardware release and marketing? Nearly every ad I’ve seen the world over has touted “Apple Intelligence” as if it’s a thing that exits, not some Coming Soon^{TM} pipe dream.

My money is on it being a massive failure if it ever does come out, the only thing stopping me from buying options is I don’t have a clue as to the timeline for when they’ll give up and ship whatever they have.

I’d prefer it to be one that the developers have specifically targeted and developed/tested against, especially if there’s any GPU involvement.

Again, you’re letting your machines decide what information exists, rather than accepting they might not have the capability of deciphering all that is out there.

Isn’t Postgres a fairly capable IAM provider, all things considered? I’d their access control mechanisms at least as much as a run of the mill external backend’s.

Apple of yesteryear would issue a patch update model and let this feature cook until it was ready for release. Current approach is sloppy in a decidedly un-Apple way.

They don’t have a reputation for releasing hardware without software to back it either. One way or another, an unprecedented process failure has occurred.

Which boggles the mind… did nobody tell the software team that a release was coming?

It nullifies your entire diatribe and all of its bogus numerics, but O.K.

Good sign of someone arguing dishonestly is that when you call out their lies, they tell you that the truth doesn’t matter.

You’re the only one here fascinated with this haplotype. Which is odd, considering you yourself call it inconsequential. Nobody but you has equated it with anything, and you have specifically said it does not equate to anything. So all in all this is just a textbook strawman, which I have no interest in further considering.

Your pseudoscience above would make it seem nobody has any DNA from any ancestors at all, as there were not your 10^Whatever creatures ever in existence. Once you figure out the bug in your logic there, you will perhaps see the failure of the rest of your argument. Hint: inbreeding.

What is your claim exactly? It seems as if you think somehow DNA didn’t exist as a means of transferring genetic information to offspring prior to it being discovered. I can’t imagine you actually think that, so I’m at a loss for what your point might be.

That was a direct quote from the parent.

> Nuclear fission is safe, clean, secure, and reliable.

> The only extant long term storage isn’t safe, clean, secure, or reliable

> You’re moving the goalposts! You should be happy with imperfect storage!

If he were to be saying that, he’d be terribly misinformed. Slight specific genetic changes can have absolutely massive impacts, hand waving “ninety nine percent of us is a banana!”-type speak is brain-dead.

I’ll let him speak for himself.

Yes. Still, His work is documented.

Aside, Jewish line is determined by matrilineal descent. By your own logic the mitochondrial DNA is shared, which is a rather significant aspect to simply gloss over.

So by that logic nobody has any DNA in common with neanderthals, right? Try again. You’re missing a big, big, gotcha.

Your link specifically states that no long term storage option exists, but it does so in a rather weaselly (“until {a future date}, there was not {safe long term storage}”) way that seems specifically crafted to confuse the reader.

It is indefensible to make arguments of likelihoods without and understanding of context and priors. If I listed 1,000 people from around the world at random and claimed we all had a shared great^N grandfather (with N not so large at to be trivially true), I’d need some rather significant proof to back up at that claim, and barring that we could say it was unlikely to be true.

If on the other hand I consulted my family’s genealogical records that had been painstakingly maintained for generations, including only those matrilineal lines that are most solid to trace, and from that listed 1,000 folks who have the same grandfather, then my claim would not be very unlikely at all.

This case is much closer to the latter than the former.

If this were true, genetic testing wouldn’t be able to identify folks as Ashkanazi Jewish, for instance. But it can. And many phenotypes do the same.

You seem very unaware of how the Jewish tribe works. Genetics and family line tracing are very much a core concept.

Fortunately, He took the time to document His work prior to leaving the company.