terryf

Yes! Glad to see someone else who also enjoys the turbulence!

Flights are boring, the rocking around is fun!

Can confirm what the other poster said - it only affects the desire for food and food-related items.

It is absolutely amazing. Before I was basically always hungry, even right after a big meal that left the stomach physically full, the thought of "eh, maybe more food?" was in the back of my mind. Now it's not there and even a small portion makes me feel full.

If anything, the weight loss has made me feel so much better that I have more energy to work on other goals, it definitely hasn't stopped desire for sex or money or success.

Right, if that is really true as a blanket statement, then it's an idiotic and short sighted law.

I have a yard, plant a rose bush. You walk in the yard, bend down to smell the rose but lose balance, fall on the rose bush and the rose pokes your eye. According to the rule, I'm not liable for your injury?

Besides being unfair and stupid, this sort of thing is actually costing society enormous amounts of lost effort, goodwill and actual money. How much time has been spent on bs court cases for things like I described? How much of a tax is liability insurance on everyone? How much fun things will never happen because of fear?

The store owner wants to do something nice for people and in your world the best way to handle that is making them jump through months of bureaucracy and probably paying a lot of money to their insurance and for permits and shit?

Yeah, this attitude is why we can't have nice things and building anything costs a billion dollars.

individual responsibility is the way things need to be handled. Make it clear that if you do X, then there exists a risk of Y, and Z. If you still want to do the thing, and for you the risk is realized, then ... well, sucks to be you I guess. But you knew what you were getting into.

And saying, "oh, but people are bad at analyzing risk" or "some people are too stupid to understand". Well, so what?

Building a world where everyone is wrapped in a soft foam and nothing can be done because there is always some element of risk, is a terrible idea.

"You can get killed walking your doggie" - Heat (1993)

Yes, 100 times yes. This is one of the big issues with the modern world, that no risk at all is acceptable. And that's bullshit. So many things that are enormous amounts of fun can get shut down because maybe someone gets slightly hurt some time or whatever.

Should we make things safe? yes, of course. But the trade off should not be "if there is any risk at all, then no". It should be made clear that risk exists and it's everyone's own personal responsibility to take that into account when doing something. And if I happen to be the unlucky guy for whom the risk realizes, then well, guess life sucks for me. Let's move on. That shouldn't stop everyone else from having fun.

Riiight. Or they could just carjack me when I'm getting in the driver's seat? Or putting my stuff in the trunk? Or while walking towards the car?

It's just silly. But thank you for explaining.

Fantastic post. Really, the UX in most new mid-range cars is terrible.

Also, can anyone explain why in the US if I click unlock on the remote, it just unlocks the front door? This keeps happening on rental cars. You have to click twice on unlock to get all the doors to open. Of course if I want to put something in the back seat, that means first breaking my fingers while pulling on the handle, then cursing and clicking the open button on the remote 10 times to makes sure the idiotic system has unlocked ALL the doors. Which I wanted it to do in the first place.

Uh, none of these are good reasons. At best they are extremely rare and weird edge cases and good UX is not making the weird edge cases dominate the experience.

I mean, how likely is it that you are in the car, NOT sitting in the front seat and a kid is sitting in the front seat and fiddling with the starter knob? I mean, even if they press the start button, then the car won't start unless you've also pressed the brake pedal? And if you're not sitting in the car while the kid is playing in it, then ... the beep does nothing anyway?

Really, the constant beeping and maniacally locking the doors all the time is ridiculous.

Also, can anyone explain why in the US if I click unlock on the remote, it just unlocks the front door? This keeps happening on rental cars. You have to click twice on unlock to get all the doors to open. Of course if I want to put something in the back seat, that means first breaking my fingers while pulling on the handle, then cursing and clicking the open button the remote 10 times to makes sure the idiotic system has unlocked the doors. Which I wanted it to do in the first place.

Really, the author of the article is 100% correct. The UX on most new mid-range cars is ridiculously bad.

The fact that you state that "an invitation to test the boundaries" and focus on the razors and nails says something about you (and probably humanity in general as well).

If you were present then what would you have done?

After all you could have given her a hug. Or used the feather to make her laugh. There were nice things on the table to choose from.

But yeah, I'd probably have done something not so nice as well. But why is that?

The bounds of morality are a social construct. So, if you stage something that is purposefully meant to create an environment that seems to be outside of society, you will get behaviour that is not bound by regular social norms and morality. It is possible that saying this was the artist's goal, but who knows.

But yes, there is no true morality. How can there be? In nature, there is only survival. A lion is happy to find some prey thas has had a stroke of bad luck and gotten stuck or hurt so it can't easily fight back.

And the previous paragraph is not meant to say that the lion is evil. No, the lion simply is.

I took Ozempic for the first time three months ago. I'm 45 years old. Three months ago was the first day that I can remember when I wasn't hungry.

Really, now I understand people when they say that "I don't want more food". Because I always wanted more food. Of course, I realized that it's important to not over-eat, and with effort it was possible.

But that's exactly the point. It's always a struggle against one of the most basic instincts you have - to not be hungry. Every day. All the time.

This is the thing that is missing from the "just eat less" slogan. That for some people it's harder than others. Honestly, I really had no idea that people felt like I feel on Ozempic.

I just thought I was weak for not being able to say no to food. I could eat until my stomach felt pysically stuffed full and still feel hungry and desire for more food.

In the context of war and hunger is my struggle the hardest one? Of course not, but it's still a struggle. Feeling fat sucks and feeling like you're weak for not being able to say no to somethig that you really really want all the time sucks.

Right - I get it that in the experiment there was no real data being delivered, but trying to consider how one would implement it in an actually useful device for me puts the speed into context. It really is incredible.

It's sort of interesting to think about how you would feed this with data.

So if there's a router box that on one side has the optical link that can transfer 1.8 pbit/s out then what's on the other side to get the data into the box? 180k 10gbit ethernet ports? Well, obviously not, so there would be ... 180 10 Tbit/s optical links?

And what would be the processor that could multiplex at that data rate?

If the latest intel 6.0ghz processor coult push out one cache line worth of data for each cycle, that would mean you need (1.8 * 10^15) / (64 * 6 * 10^9 * 8) = 586 of these processors! Could some custom silicon handle this or would you need some optical processing?

Wild stuff.

Yeah, there are of course also water-air, water-water pumps (although I've never heard of the open-circuit ones, but yeah, why not). But you have to have access to a large enough body of water that doesn't freeze and has enough capacity.

The main issue for me with air-X heat pumps is that over time it can start to make a lot of noise if not well maintained.

But the closed-circuit under-ground (or under-water) ones essentially don't need maintenance and are incredibly efficient, as the source never goes very cold.

Heat pumps don't have to be air-air pumps. Most commonly these days I hear people installing air-water heat pumps to replace gas furnaces that heat water for radiators or under-floor heating. For new houses around here, ground-water heat pumps are actually most common as they are very efficient even if it's cold outside, but they require diffing up a large area to install the under-ground piping.

Yes.

Riight. This does present a conundrum though.

If god exists, then he may have chosen to make the wather warm, but then it also means that he chose to not stop the killing of innocent civilians in the war.

So, if god exists, he is an a*hole.

It's expensive but possible to enforce IP protection globally.

Sorry to be that guy, but this is exactly why lawyers and IP protection were invented.

As a hacker, I hate that these are needed. As a member of society that tries to be considerate and respectful of others, this seems like a ridiculous and wateful overhead.

However, as a realist with some experience in being brain-raped by a bigger company, unfortunately you need to protect yourself from the people that aren't nice or don't care.

And I'm also pying the bakeries and business owners more for their services.

Really, talking to people here - even random ones, like a taxi driver, I've literally never ran into anyone that does not want to keep supporting Ukraine.

Because we know that if Russia wins in Ukraine, we are next. What's money against your life and the feeling of safety?

Hello from Europe!

While I agree that there really aren't any winners in a war from a humanitarian perspective, it really doesn't feel here like we are losing.

I'm happy to pay a lot for electricity and gas if that means the Russian government will fall and their army will be reduced to shreds (although the gas prices right now are almost the same as they used to be before the war... )

Also to the US, this is an incredibly cheap (it's what, $50B this year?) way of bringing the Russian army to it's knees.

I'm about 200km from the russian border right now. Having those a*holes go down would be definitely a cause for celebration.

The in-fighting that will occur when the current government collapses will weaken them further.

The Ukraine war has strengthened NATO and shown the (quite surprising!) unity of Europe to the point that people here just aren't afraid any more.

You sure seem to be absolute in that belief ;)

The other guy is right. Moral relativism is not the way.

There are limits to acceptance as you imply in your comment.

Freedom is measurable and matters.

How long is the list of things that you can do for which the state can repress you in Saudi Arabia? How long is the list in Belgium?

Is there a fair trial process?

Are there equal rights to people?

Yes, some people want to cover their faces and that is fine. Some others don't. That should be fine as well.

Really? Why such a negative comment?

As an example, I don't like when people touch my hair. Always had a hard time going to the hairdresser.

Don't think that makes me mentally ill. People like different things. Ain't nothing wrong with that.

So you should be forced to IPO when a company valuation is 1b? Okay, fine.

So if you IPO at 1b ( probably the valuation will drop after ipoing early but ok ) you are not considered a "psychopath" ?

I'm sure all the employees with stock options will be thrilled as well after they drop in value.

Curious. How do you see the system actually working - how do you stop at a billion?

So, let's say you start a company. Then raise some VC money. You start getting users and things are going really well, but you aren't quite profitable. You see a path to that but need to make investments to get there. So you raise another round of money. However, as you are doing well, the valuation of the company is set to three billion. As the founder, you still own 50% of the shares.

You are technically now a billionaire. Of course, just on paper but Forbes will still put you on the "overnight billionaire" list.

What are you supposed to do in this case ? When exactly did you go from "not psychopath" to "psychopath"?

Terminology matters. VCs are absolutely not writing €20k checks in Europe. Angel investors are.

But in this case copilot is not equivalent to copy-paste. When doing copy-paste, you are acting with knowledge of the source of the copied code and with intent to copy code.

With copilot, you are not acting with knowledge of the source and not with intent to copy, in fact I'm sure the users would have a reasonable expectation of the tool not copy-pasting existing code verbatim.

IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that intent matters a lot.

Popcorn time was also just a tool to allow you to stream data from torrents. That didn't seem to help them put up a legal defence (nor should it have, because the intent was pretty clear on that one).

And seriously, if cases exist, where the only thing a tool does (albeit via a VERY complex implementation path) is to strip a license from a piece of code and serve that code up via an API, then that really does sound like the creators of the tool are at fault.