lesuorac

> "You can sit in a concrete box all day and then eat food that was rejected from the dog food plant"

Isn't that not the actual choice though?

Like for a prison with monetary advantages to the inmates working don't they actually send you to solitary for refusing work detail?

When nobody lets you build a land data center they're going to make a lot of sense.

October[1] to August[2] isn't even a single year.

Definitely longer than I'd expect for "cleared" considering everybody involved should have to be licensed and pretty sure you pay a fee to the FDA so that should cover the cost of FDA hiring employees to just call each person involved to verify the submission is accurate.

Although IIUC, they were already allowed to do 50yr+ people and the recent clearance is just for 40yr+ so I'm not actually sure how uh impactful this is (a bit more confused why it takes 10 months to drop the age by 10 years).

[1]: https://precivityad.com/news/c2n-submits-us-fda-regulatory-f...

[2]: https://c2n.com/news-releases/bg2ziqcz39o3wxf5uc04u279ziw0yv

> More than 2,000 bins were cleared from the Square Mile after a truck bomb killed one person and injured 44

While I'm not intimate with the difference between British English and American English, I'm pretty confident "Truck Bomb" does not mean a bomb inside a rubbish bin.

But yes, vehicles are a great vector for terrorism and I'm honestly surprised at how few instances there are of people just running other over. But it's also one of the reasons in the US basically every government building has large concrete planters around them (can't ram a truck through it).

Why would you throw a bomb into a garbage can? Who loiters next to one?

100% just drop it behind you as you exit the tram. Way better metal container for blasting.

"Counter-terrorism" just means nobody thought about it more than 2 seconds or else they'd have a more specific reason.

So we should just let companies flood doctors with potential treatments and then hope they have enough time to figure out whats relevant for their patients?

Seems much better use of time and money to have people developing tests meet a pre-defined standard and after that point they're allowed to flood doctors with marketing for the tests.

What use is future medical advancements if it can't meet low bars like proving it works?

Sure, and the casinos in Nevada routinely pay out billions too. They (like Jane Street) just happen to have revenues in excess of their losses so they turn a profit.

> The secretive Wall Street trading firm, however, has generated trading revenue of more than $40 billion year to date, one of the sources said, easily outstripping trading revenue at the largest banks and other market-making rivals

I feel like you're implying that the sharks tanked the stock price to then buy the assets at an artificially deflated price.

I think the truth is really that being 4x leverage in the long term is just bad decision making as the stock market is volatile and the "sharks" (Citadel) know this and know that you didn't hedge the volatility (you showed them your books previously) and decided just to wait for you to finish hanging yourself. The difference being a lack of active action by the shark.

I dunno, now that you phrased it this way I feel like it does matter.

Image he took a blow-torch to a safe and the door welded shut. The contents are still there but the door is broken.

> perhaps, but what public activity isn't activism?

Buying eggs at the grocery store.

You might be too familiar with "activism" as a perjurative but it needn't be one. Gaining visibility to your case by the media reporting on an arrest is sometimes seen as a plus (ex. Rosa Parks).

I'm not personally much of that mindset because the media didn't de-segregate the buses. It was black people literally just never taking them until it de-segregated that did.

Can you just read the article first.

> Erik Slavin, editor-in-chief of the military newspaper that is partly funded by the Pentagon, told The Associated Press he was dismissed for insubordination after an interview he gave that objected to potential censorship by the U.S. military.

Really don't know what's wrong with a 3rd party asking your opinion and you saying I think it would be bad if my boss censored me. Seems a silly reason to be fired.

Those aren't the only two choices.

We also have the classic example of PHP with numerous not safe stdlib ways to use mysql.

To me the answer is still to vendor your dependencies and don't be on the bleeding edge of updates unless you're willing to invest the time into validating them.

Look, it's really simple we'll have 3 laws that the robots follow and nothing will go wrong.

There's no fact checker here that stops downvotes for correct comments.

I would say don't get hung up over it but judging by your karma I'm more surprised your commenting about it.

Had* always been accessible.

Afaik, it's location dependent now with the default being no.

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/27/the-reason-why-costco-is-ban...

So, if you go read through all the FBI reports about Black Lives Matters you find references to OMGs. Apparently a lot of various organizations like Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs will use large events like protests as cover.

There's also counter-protesters which will attempt to agitate (they might argue the protesters agitated them) and cause problems.

So, largely protesters cannot be disciplined because not everybody there is actually in agreement as to why they're there.

--

That said. It's a public roadway. The proper punishment for driving poorly is a police citation not a bullet.

Arguable he had all 3. He was right about the market going up for AI, he was right about the years, and he had double-digit billions behind him.

It's just there's no sufficient capital when you decide to re-leverage to 4x every time you can.

Imo a bit of both.

The founders [1] of mcdonalds probably did care about say cheaply providing people with enjoyable food. But I would bet soon after they sold [2] the company the actual values changed and definitely a bunch of CEOs down the road the guy put in charge is there for shareholder return.

I personally don't think it's computers. It's unfettered corperatization. Stop giving companies corporate charters to "do all business activities allowed by X state" and instead give them more narrow charters.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_and_Maurice_McDonald

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Kroc

Very interesting graphics.

Definitely changed my mind over RCV vs STAR. Although I'll still support either if I had the opportunity.

You can vote with your vote too.

There's a reason Tim Apple gave Trump a golden trophy.

> The US is a net oil exporter, while China halved their oil imports [2].

This seems to be the opposite point you want.

Everybody is going to have increased expenses for everything due to their oil dependency _except_ China. Which will raise the price of Chinese exports to the market price but giving China a lot of producer surplus.

Or China can keep doing it's Belt & Road plans and grant other countries money to help with their oil problems in exchange for territory. Or also keep prices lower to continue hollowing out other countries manufacturing capabilities.

--

The leaders of South America claiming to be "Trump aligned" is good for Trump. Trump is not the average american citizen. And boy will those leaders flip the second he's out of the presidency.

Everybody here is all so small minded.

The government has spent centuries doing spycraft and has a budget in the billions.

> We have this notion of “retraining” but that’s not real.

While I haven't been "retrained" my understanding was the real issue that it's lip-service.

Like the Department of Labor doesn't actually show up to a closed down factory with staff to train people in some other vocation.

Right, his popularity increased in the US election because people did not like the incumbent (Biden / Harris).

Take a look at other world wide elections that happened in 2024.

Like France (parliamentary system so no presidential election); The incumbents lost 33% of their seats [1].

Or UK; The incumbents lost 67% of their seats [2]

And yet, Trump didn't even make it to 50% of US votes. People really did not like him. People really hated incumbents. Your numbers even show this, Biden 1 has more votes than Trump 2; they just didn't support the incumbent anymore.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_French_legislative_electi...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_general_el...

Idk maybe there is something nefarious but afaik Putin's always been cordial with Trump as well as let him do various investments in Russia. I'm not sure there's much reason for Trump to alienate his friend; if you've ever see Trump's staff meetings you'll know how much cordiality is important to him.

Not just that but they voted significantly more against the incumbent in the rest of the world than the US.

People really did not like Trump they just didn't like incumbents more.

It's almost like if the Democrats ran a competitive primary this whole situation could've been avoided.

You should never need to pick between just two candidates though.

The need for any sort of alternative system to first-past-the-post should've been plainly obvious in the '00 election. The problem is the people that could change that were elected under a first-past-the-post system and don't want to lose their current advantage.

You don't think he tanked the company?

Twitter used to be profitable.

Now, it needed to be folded into xAI to survive. Then that combined mass needed to be folded into SpaceX to survive. Then that combined mass needed to IPO to survive.

Sure, Elon can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent. Doesn't make it not a tank.

Dunno about the Boq stuff but it regularly tries to run `git status` in a fig workspace ...

> Blended Exclusivity Score ... 17/4000 = 0.425%

> In a gaggle of 100 suitors, it's actually unlikely that a single one will meet all three criteria. Perfection. We now have a truly unreasonable set of standards by which to choose our dating partner.

Is it actually truly unreasonable?

Who has not seen 4000 males? Sure, you might not be able to name 4000 but that's not the criteria. You only need to learn about 1000 of them because visually you can tell the remaining 3000 are too short. And of those 1000 you only need to learn a little to tell if they're going to earn over 100k (i.e. what career path and where they rank in their cohorts).

That Blended Exclusivity Score is really a minimum so of the 170 remaining people at least 17 qualify. You don't even have to sleep with the remaining unqualified ones, make sure the lights are on and just leave if it's too short.