imacomputertoo

Fix the patent problem. Leave the r&d right off alone.

Is there more context to this question? I couldn't read the article because of the pay wall. But in isolation, this is a dumb question. All decent parents want their child to live as long as possible and be as healthy as possible. Is there something deeper you were trying to get at?

I saw this movie as a kid when it came out on vhs. it blew me away! I loved the blind guy. He was amazing. That part where he listens to the sounds on the road to determine where they took Robert Redford. You're right, it made blind people cool.

Fluoride is not "in fact toxic". A substance becomes toxic in high amounts. Vitamin D becomes toxic in high amounts. The level of fluoride in drinking water is well below the toxic level.

The right wing of the US is not driven by white supremacy. It's driven by a belief in a variety of mostly false grievances, about immigration, the economy, the wealth gap, etc. Those bogus beliefs are held by white and non white people.

Consider that Trump won almost 50% of Latino male voters. As a percentage of the vote, Trump did better with racial minorities and women in 2024 than 2020, and much better compared to 2016.

White supremacy is real and it has some effect in US politics, but it's not a driving force anymore. I say this as someone who has lived both in and outside the US. The outside perspective is not always better. Germans may be seeing the US through the lens of their own history.

How can these happiness scores be meaningful? It's all just surveys, and self reporting. It's subjective and sensitive to cultural differences.

> Buying a second house...

I hear this so the time from people who have never owned a home. It's partly true, but not as good if a deal as you think. True that you don't have to pay capital gains taxes when you sell, but that's true of 401ks when taking distributions.

As for HELOC loans, well that's more debit in to of your mortgage. You could get that from an SBLOC from your brokerage account, and under some circumstances, from a 401k. Again this is all more debit, and you don't want that unless you are desperate.

Finally, owning a home does not protect you from increasing housing costs. Increasing property values will increase your taxes and insurance every year, just like a rent increase. Maintenance costs will hit you like a hammer. In the end you pa thousands to maintain your home every year. The only reason to buy a house is to capture a small percentage of the over all cost in equity. But it takes about a decade before that saves money over renting.

All these people complaining about not being able to afford a home don't even have savings. First, get a few months of savings, then max out your 401k or open a brokerage account, then consider buying a house if you think you'll live there for a year.

>What is they want to give themselves a better life

That's not always possible. If you immigrate at the age of 50 and you're very poor, it might be too late. Still, many people will simply benefit from living in a more stable nation.

>All tvs are flat screen now

It was true in 2000 and it's true now. maybe I should have said 4k tvs? it makes no difference.

people have been saying the American dream is dead my entire life. I'm tired of hearing it.

I'm also tired of people saying the American dream is about becoming a billionaire. It's not. It never has been. It's always been about having the opportunity to improve your wealth and living standards. Sometimes that means just leaving something better for your children, much like the Italian and Irish immigrants did That American dream is very much still alive.

On a related note, I'm tired of hearing people say they can't afford to buy a home. Buying a house is a very expensive and slow way to build wealth. These people would do better to put some money into a low cost index fund, or max out their 401k if they have one.

Obviously, the very poor do not have money to invest with, but they can give their children a better life. it's certainly not easy, but it's possible. The working class, however (not the most poor), routinely chooses to put their money into flat screen tvs, Iphones, expensive vehicles and clothing, and other depreciable assets. We've failed to teach people how to take advantage of the abundant opportunities in America, and we have a culture of frivolous spending.

No poem had ever made me feel the crunch of snow under my boots or see the flakes floating down like this poem. It's visceral.

Google will certainly try to prevent that!

The conclusion of this data presentation is that so of these people are our collective responsibility, and I just wasn't convinced. I wish they had shown percentages with the visualization. They choose not to.

I was underwhelmed by some points that seemed like they should have been more shocking. Look at the huge number of people in the many adverse experiences category who made it to college, and make a high salary. that was shocking! and look at the people who had no adverse experiences and still managed to end up poor. how does that happen?

I was left with the impression that if the government threw a lot of resources at it we might be able to move a noticeable percentage of those people in a better direction, but not most of them.

The questions that remain are, how many people's lives could we improve and by how much? And, critically, how much are we willing to collectively sacrifice to move that percentage of people in a positive direction?

"...due to the climaxing rampant corruption in the US..." What?

"...constraints of corrupt capitalism" caused websites to be boated?

Be careful because there are two many out of pocket amounts. One for in network and one for our of network. Most ACA plans that I can get in my state do not have an out of network max. That's a huge risk because most hospitals have out of network contractors. That means if you stay in a hospital that is in network, you'll still get billed separately for out of network care. And half the hospital staff might be out of network. So you can still go bankrupt in an in network hospital. The ACA really didn't do much to protect people from bankruptcy.

That "tax cuts for the rich" line buds me so much. Republicans do not simply cut taxes for the rich. I've looked at income tax tables going back to the mid 70's. It's clear that Republicans cut taxes for all, not just the rich. Regan , G.W. Bush, and Trump cut taxes for the poorest, Middle class and the wealthy. I don't know of any case in the past 50 years when Democrats have cut taxes for the poor, though Obama did continue the Bush tax cuts.

Now if that's a good policy to cut taxes and spend as much as they do (Trump especially), that is another question.

Thank you! I was just watching Oppenheimer yesterday, and cringed at the part where he points out that Alfred Nobel invited dynamite as a reason he might get the award for the A bomb. It's a silly idea. As you put it, it's a quirk of history. Interesting, but not relevant.

Isn't this rejected by the study. If poor people have less to lose, then why doesn't the data show that increasing their wealth reduces their crime rate? If they are awarded more money, then they have more to lose, yet their rate is crime forward but decrease according to this study, no?

I've been using swipe on Android for almost a decade and it still features me. Sometimes it works well. Other times it mangles almost every word in a sentence. I've sent thousands of embarrassing messages over the years, but I can't imagine doing regular typing all the time.

it was obviously marketing material, but if this tweet is right, then it was just blatant false advertising.

Now if someone were to make one of those pizza ordering LLM agents do the calling for them...

I suppose that would be like spamming the carriers. Not sure that's better, but it might make them act.

I really like some aspects of this, but I don't understand the incentives. If I own a home, I want to know everything about it. However, if I'm selling a home, I don't want the buyers to know everything about it. I also don't want the sellers to learn something about it, that might be considered as having some bearing on the value of the house. In other words, I don't want to get caught knowing something that I should have disclosed but didn't. So as a home owner and potential seller someday, it's better not to make a record of everything because that could hurt me when I sell. It also doesn't benefit me at all to have helped the new owner.

This all might sound very cynical, but it really does seem like incentive misalignment.

I'm an ideal world, every home would have a permanent, up to date, digital record of all the relevant home info. Building planes, modifications, maintenance records, paint and shingle colors, wire and plumbing placement, maybe even a 3d model of the home with structure, plumbing and wiring info. Unfortunately, I don't see how a homeowner would be better off giving that info to the next owner.

My two cents: if you're using YouTube do much that this bothers you, then just buy premium. It's well worth it in my opinion. You also get the music service. I use it instead of Spotify. I think you also get a few free movies too. No I don't work for Google.

That sounds like something that's easily fixable with battery saving options. Basically, when in battery, don't do that. That would be a good default.

Yes, memory. 4$ droplets have only 512mb. that's barely enough to run bundle install for one application.

6$ droplets give you 1GB and that's plenty for one app,

I'm not sure when a company begins to not be a start up, but by the time they have a wave of news claiming their product kills teenagers, or they're engaging in antitrust, or they're effectively using space labor, that's when they are definitely no longer a start up.

That hasn't happened yet for OpenAI, but I'm sure it will happen eventually, and then we'll know.

This seems like a very hostile and unreasonable take. People in developing countries have far greater need for access to financial services, banking and loans. rich countries have that already because they have stable governments. Poor countries don't. While crypto has its risks, the risks of unstable national currencies can be greater. So it's a reasonable decision to consider crypto in that context. People in rich countries have less need. For rich stable nations, crypto will have to offer more than simple services and better-than-Venezuela security.

I went through a similar arch of sentiment since discovering crypto in about 2014. the field really is full of scams, but I think that's being cleared out. Bitcoin and Ethereum are emerging from that as legitimate projects. Still government regulation could squash them, or they might just fail, but if they were scams, I think they would have pulled the rug by now.

I started a blog this summer thinking I would use it to chronicle my exploration of all things AI. I've only posted once. I think the hard thing is just staying disciplined enough to post regularly.

I think that makes sense. so many experienced employees have been laid off that companies don't need to hire newbies any more. Six years I started working for a company that hired 3 senior devs and boatloads of bootcamp grads. for a new project. I doubt that would happen now.

I noticed the "make a website in X minutes" video phenomenon too. I wrote a blog post about it where I examine about 10 of these videos and discuss how serious they are. You can see it here. https://joehuntblog.com/posts/build-website-with-chatgpt-no-...

It might be an American thing, but I'm fine with that. Keeping it professional means having a professional attitude - smiling and being courteous. At least it does in America.