jtbayly

It's very different, because you aren't moving from car to car. You're using your car with your digital key. There is no expectation of things changing. Rightly so.

“Against the sandbox” and “on the sandbox” are not the same thing.

Yesterday ChatGPT gave me 5 references to a site that doesn’t exist. It’s such a bummer how useless these tools are so much of the time, while seeming so helpful. In fact they are actually helpful, which is why it’s so irritating.

My apologies. Apparently my own estimate about how high fireworks generally go was way off.

Or buy it literally from anybody other than Amazon.

Given your statement of "hundreds of feet" I guess I can take the rest of your post with a large pinch of salt, too.

M80s were more like 1/8th of a stick, I think. My uncle bought quarter sticks of dynamite one time. Wow. Quite a bit bigger and louder than an M80, and M80s were LOUD! My dad's cousin blew off most of his thumb and parts of several fingers with one. It was old, and it had a flash fuse. He was planning to toss it, but it went off instantly. (Don't hold fireworks when you are lighting them.)

A couple of years ago my brother got some flat triangles from a guy on the side of the road. First thing I've seen in years that was like an M80. We put a flat soccer ball over one, and it went 50 feet in the air. Very fun.

I'm not sure if being homemade was the reason, but I just heard about a medflight for somebody hit by a homemade firework.

I say this as somebody with a book on how to make them, but I've always been a bit too scared to try.

The existence of IDs indicates that people are not intended to be untrackable, whether on or offline.

This is a fair trade off, because…

By your logic, there can be no argument against universal web tracking, let alone universal purchase tracking, etc.

I mean, what’s the problem with taking such stickers off? I’d love if it we had fewer retarded warnings. And I fail to see how they have anything to do with enforcing consumer protections.

Which is completely the opposite—running Apple software on non-Apple hardware—so they make no money whatsoever off such users.

More renewables means the need for more base load? This is the first I’ve seen anybody say that.

I found the shift in what foods companies are making to be the most interesting part of the article.

Adding protein to foods, but somehow decreasing meat consumption. Seems odd.

By demonstrating an assumption that everybody knows nothing? I fail to see how that is beneficial. It is rude to everybody.

Reread what I wrote. The point is it is more rude to assume somebody is ignorant than it is to assume they are knowledgeable.

This is telling people to assume people are ignorant or at least pretend you think they are ignorant.

Is being surprised somebody doesn't know something putting them down, or is being unsurprised they are ignorant putting them down?

People doing that are doing it intentionally, and they aren't going to follow your rule.

People who are open to listening are not pretending to be surprised in order to put somebody down. They are actually surprised and (perhaps) unintentionally hurting somebody. If that somebody is hurt, they need to ask themselves which hurts more, having somebody surprised you didn't know something (aka they think you are smart), or being unsurprised you are ignorant of something (aka they think you don't know stuff).

Either way, that’s not feigning surprise. Odd to call it that. What they are saying is when you are surprised somebody didn’t know something, don’t let it show.

So “feign unsurprise.”

A "perfect shuffle" according to the article:

>The riffle shuffle has to follow a realistic but strict model where cards are randomly interleaved from the left or right pile one by one. (Each card gets dropped from either the left or the right pile with a probability that’s proportional to the number of cards remaining in that pile. This means that the cards don’t simply alternate between left and right, which would result in a predictable structure; instead, the order might go “left, right, right, left, right, left, left.”)

Because they have held off on adding these companies to the list in order to avoid increasing tensions with China?

ETA from the first paragraph of the article: "The U.S. has held off... to avoid escalating tensions with Beijing."

Which is not what is being discussed. Often rewriting code to make it more understandable makes everybody more productive.

A lot of "plagiarism" is not plagiarism. Feed stuff you wrote into those tools and it will call you a plagiarist every day because you wrote something similar to the person you learned it from.

I don't know about this case, but a lot of these kinds of cases truly are witch-hunts. It's not at all like the reproducibility crisis and faked data and images.

404 on your link

I saw that one wealthy individual had purchased $1 billion of SpaceX at the IPO. Does that count as a retail investor?

I don’t think so. I’d want more than just your word on it.

That tool could be interesting if there was a way to stop the rendered globe from spinning. As is, it is unusable

From the ISS, perhaps.

This is a place where I could see Apple actually investing serious money in AI research to sell devices.

Both GDP and living standards are discussed in the article. The NHS is addressed near the beginning as proof of the deteriorating condition of living standards. 1/10th of the population are on a waiting list for care. 1/10th have done DIY dental work.

You're right that GDP is not a measure of living standards. But neither is saying "NHS" a measure of living standards. Do you actually have a measure you could refer to in order to prove the article wrong?

There is a footnote in the article does the math. It concludes, "power is no more than about 1% of revenue."