pas

every time oil is removed the walls are damaged (because they pump in water to force out the oil, which dissolves more of the walls)

https://www.construction-physics.com/p/how-the-strategic-pet...

brothel?

the quote was removed in ~2 days.

https://github.com/neovim/neovim.github.io/pull/504 of course with sweet sweet drama!

https://infosec.exchange/@david_chisnall/117172601365228235

they use "autoread" to work around that (but it requires vim to be running and the given file open if I understand correctly)

https://infosec.exchange/@david_chisnall/117172481079439378

it doesn't have "durable" though :)

it seems they are using 'autoread' (but I guess this only works if vim is running while the modification happens)

https://infosec.exchange/@david_chisnall/117172481079439378

https://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=5206

space is 3D, but the information content can be encoded on a 2D hologram. general relativity works, mass-energy is curving spacetime, it just happens to do it in a way, that these curves and slopes and ... the whole 3D geometry can be flattened to 2D without loss of information.

I tried to hint in my comment that the argument is completely different. the supply chain risk is just what the media runs with. (yes, it's in the opinion, but that is the weaker part. and the court agrees, that it basically does not apply to Anthropic.)

there's section 4713 which is roughly "Secretary of War can pull the nat.sec. card, bye"

just because someone copied one sentence from some online reference it doesn't mean that the court used it for arguing their decision.

https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2026/09/26-104...

> Whatever paradigmatic examples individual members of Congress may have had in mind, the statutory definition is not limited to “adversar[ies],” 10 U.S.C. § 3252(d)(4), and instead covers “any person,”

that section is not important (the court says so, read page 30 https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2026/09/26-104... ) section 4713 is ("determination of exigency" regarding procurement decisions)

the courts interpret the statute, we have to read their argument where they explain why they think that's not the right definition to focus on. (the "adversary" is in section 3252, but they say that independently from that section 4713 allows determination of exigency.)

https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2026/09/26-104... see page 30

Lot of democratically elected states are also good at "keeping fentanly out".

we are not the target audience.

there are living and breathing people who say no to the offer of "do you want an adblocker?", because installing things is scary. even if you offer to do it for them. no. they have something that is held together by the gracious whimsy of the iGoogle deity, and they are in a constant state of bewilderment when it comes to "technology".

> Roel Maalderink visited the company's Amsterdam office

Intelligence as a measure of the ability to define predictive models of certain problems (and their solutions).

Promoting LLMs is encoding the problem we want into the query vectors, and through the magic of the complex training and the power of operations in a very large dimensional abstract space the AI can manipulate the representations, and iteratively approximate solutions. (And using bigger and bigger contexts and better encodings it can form better models.)

I'm not saying absence of evidence of wrongdoing is evidence of absence of wrongdoing.

But note, you have very concrete things to claim about Bitfinex. Criminal enterprise, scam, organized crime funding, facilitating arms dealing and embargo avoidance, and so on.

Then you throw in 2008. It's definitely popular but example of what? Bad thing that didn't fail? (Things did fail, hence the crisis? Or you mean the too big to fail attitude?)

Policy proposals (eg. "coordinated AI safety R&D should be exempt from antitrust regulations" or "TARP made money on paper, but the financial sector should pay for the total cost of the crisis") cannot be divorced from the provenance of the source (sex cult, goldbugs, anticapitalists), but the same is true of bluesky screeds.

it's the Ed Zitron style of arguing that something big/expensive/unprecedented/hard is bad, going to fail, because [____________].

and if you put something trivially true into the blank the implication seems logical, and the argument feels powerful. but simply putting a true claim at the end doesn't mean that everything before follows from this claim. (and even if they do the argument is not a total description of all the causal chains that influence the outcomes.)

of course it's hard to do a careful survey of the facts and weigh them and then deduce some likelihoods for possibilities. because some aspects are unprecedented (investment ferocity, AI results/progress) while others are very much precedented (collapse of investment bubbles, doomsayers' wrong predictions).

there's a difference in semantics between clinical reason and billing, agreed, though it seems that the news article did not sensationalize the study, and the study uses at least one valid code that can be a primary reason for a visit, and while I'm absolutely just a random dog on the internet, for me the overlap in meaning seems significant to warrant the use of this term.

https://icdlist.com/icd-10/F63.0

https://icdlist.com/icd-10/Z72.6 "The code is not accepted as a principal diagnosis "

apparently there's an ICD code for it

i guess if someone gets a meltdown (mental breakdown) after losing a lot of money

> emergency department visits in which a gambling disorder was recorded as either the main or a contributing reason for the visit.

from the study

> An ED visit for a gambling disorder was defined on the basis of the clinical judgement of the treating team and was identified when ICD-10 codes F63.0 (pathological gambling) or Z726 (gambling or betting problems) were coded as the main or contributing reason for the visit.

> In 29.3% of these ED visits, a gambling disorder was listed as the primary cause of the visit,

> emergency department visits in which a gambling disorder was recorded as either the main or a contributing reason for the visit.

they don't seem mutually exclusive

> express our own agency

ironically a local model and Playwright/OpenClaw is pretty close

they connect ideas all day. xenophobia is that, making fast and loose connections.

unfortunately we are deep into the TikTok times, and simple, but catchy ideas dominate. it's flat Earth, QAnon, anti-vax, anti-economics but now in 4K.

yes, but also there's a real obvious unserved/underserved voting bloc

https://www.slowboring.com/p/a-boring-theory-of-the-populist...

without convincing the people (winning their hearts and minds, and so on) it'll continue to be a profitable political strategy, unfortunately

yes, just as age verification can be fooled by an older friend who gets the check mark.

it's entirely possible that that specific communication from that Amazon exec/rep (?) was just one of many "messages of concern" (and the one that eventually the WH picked)

> Is this actually measuring "underemployment"

Sort of. It's "all of the above". So basically low demand for labor.

* Looking for a job.

* People who don't work full time but want to.

* Poverty wages. (below $26,000 (in 2025 dollars) annually before taxes)

The set of symptoms is roughly recognizable and treatment protocols are established. There's some data and bad theories, and informed consent based on all this. (Imagine how informed the patient can be downstream of this!)

So yes, just as with depression, where we have only very crude understanding of how SSRIs work. We have the RCTs, cohort studies, and we know that it's better than placebo.

Some people fight with depression through their whole life. Just as with ADHD.

As with Alzheimer's we are painfully in the dark with regards to etiology, prevention and treatment, but that doesn't mean it's not real.

There's multiple Alzheimer's (there's the early onset familial version, and it has something to do with APOE4 / amyloid, but there's the rest which is a big question mark), it's also not real yet, because the biomarkers we have are almost useless. Still we try what makes sense, and try to help people who are suffering from it. Same as with ADHD.

And just as the heritability of any complex behavior (intelligence and susceptibility to depression) is not a simple thing it doesn't mean it's not real.