307 karma · joined March 4, 2024
42MP???
Wouldn't that just rapidly fill up the storage for most of their users
with little if any other tangible benefit ... maybe that is part of the plan :-) ... the profit
The local data plans are typically more broadly useable and cheaper than the $10/GB that Fi offers.
When it comes to Europe (and this might apply to other destinations as well) Fi is a bad deal.
if American manufactured automobiles were bringing in substantially more money to drive-throughs than Japanese ones - and if American made automobiles had a way to influence where you drive ... I think they would also get a cut from the drive throughs
There is a video link on the page from the original post where the Patreon CEO explains and reiterates the issues.
Notably, at one point, he says that Apple Platform brings in the most money to Patreon.
So there, looks like Apple brings in the money for Patreon. Apple seems to want a cut of that.
Not trolling - and I think Apple is greedy here. Still I need pointing out how your arguments is not logical.
This is like saying you can only sell your product for a % of someone else profit.
Apple should be allowed to charge whatever they want - as long as they don't have monopoly on the process. That is the crux of the problem here. Monopoly is the problem not the percentages.
I don't think the word DONATION is irrelevant at all.
Tim Sweeney is using the word "DONATION" deliberately to make Apple look like someone that steals even the "donations".
You know like someone stealing from the church lockbox.
I am not supporting Apple here at all, I am just pointing out the attempt to manipulate public opinion.
to me that is the main distinction, who is benefiting from making that monetary contribution
otherwise, it is just an issue of timing, did I pay up front or later after a tried and liked the product
If you derive satisfaction from a product, expect someone to produce it, and support that process, then it is a purchase regardless of what someone calls it.
Many times, I met people who genuinely believed they were super close and about to achieve a "huge" breakthrough.
In each case, the scientists themselves, in their minds, were absolutely convinced they were on the brink of unfathomable achievements: curing Alzheimers, or some cancers etc.
Particularly true for the scientists in biomedical startups - they were like Mulder from X-Files; they all wanted (and were desperately eager) to believe. Like Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos, I think she completely believed her own exaggerations and BS - at some point, fact and fiction merge.
Thus I've become extraordinarily skeptical of articles like these.
I am merely explaining what the issue at hand is - I am not saying that is what the proposed medicine does. Another way to say it, is the compound treating the symptom or the problem - or perhaps both.
Imagine you have a hernia that hurts and you take medicine that masks that pain, do you still have hernia?
> Tag strings extract more than just a callable from the Interpolation. They also provide Python string formatting info, as well as the original text.
The feature is akin to moving print from a keyword to a function. That change also made a huge difference in that it unified the output stream and avoided having undefined objects like a "print" keyword.
Here, you can think of the feature as moving an "f" string from a hardcoded, predetermined definition to a generalizable and programmable behavior.
If "f" strings have become so popular so quickly it means they addressed a pressing need. It is logical to assume that a programmable version of an "f" string would be even more useful.
If a syntax such as f"{variable}" is already a feature - and turned out to be a popular one - why shouldn't we be able to add our own custom "f"s? Because that is what this is about. It might make generating output even simpler.
I applaud the idea and am pleased to see that Python keeps innovating!
It is simply that bureaucrats have passed regulations where they do not understand the repercussions
Every domain that is bogged down by bureaucracy will have inefficiencies of various magnitudes.
it is very uncommon to have children go hungry in America, because food is plentiful, and numerous charitable organizations would eagerly step in.
Bad parenting may happen everywhere in the world.
For some brownie points, googling seems to indicate that Germany has a hunger crisis:
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/09/world/germany-food-b...
An improperly devised system that can be easily circumvented.
It is not relevant to the subject matter of health care, it is not different than corn subsidy or whatever.
Maybe that cost is low. I don't know, but putting out a number with no context seems to be for shock value only, not realistics.
How much would it be if they met doctors?
A new high school in the US costs 100 million dollars. It seems they build 200 such schools per year. All of a sudden we have a spending of 20 billion on just new high schools each year. Is that too much or too little?
In my area it is a school policy that a kid would not be denied food even if they had no money in their account - and every place I lived had organizations that would eagerly step up to address such a problem if and when it manifested.
For what it is worth, during COVID and a few years after, in my state every kid got free lunch in school regardless of their income.
There is no logical reason to expect that seeds, in general—carrying the energy for new life, containing the most valuable and precious resources—would constitute the "worst" food ingredient known to mankind.
Is an active lifestyle easy? Well, it is easy if you like being active, and extremely hard if you hate it.
Being able to predict an outcome has nothing to do with the process of deriving the outcome, and it has nothing to do with bias.
There may be many signals that correlate with an outcome. If you are out of shape and move ploddingly, you probably can't do a triple axel even though you believe you can. Is that prediction biased?
Bias would be if you could demonstrate that predicting the outcome has influenced their decision-making.
Is it difficult to believe that a judge would be able to predict at least some outcomes from a single paragraph?
All it takes is to predict above random chance to have a statistically significant effect.
If I owe you 100 grand and I can't pay, I am in trouble.
If I owe you 100 trillion and I can't pay, you are in trouble.
We, the population, vote for the persons with specific political wills. We choose what to enact.
From the outside, it feels like some "tacit trade" where poor Eastern European nations provide the labor, the rich western countries send "funds" back to them, and it all works until there is an imbalance between the rich and the poor.
The techniques described in the article, such as audio, visual, or haptic feedback when reaching the speed limit or maintaining speed at the limit sound useful and a solution to the above.
Most critics interpret the article as the car taking over the decision-making - but that does not seem to be the case at all.
Maybe the post is less about what is right or wrong in medicine and more about the author having gone into the wrong field, which is opposite to what they enjoy in life.
Perhaps all along, the author misunderstood what modern medicine is about and how life really works. There is no miracle cure that would restore the neural system.
There is a miracle prevention however, be active, exercise, eat well, sleep well, enjoy life, contribute to society. That will help your back more than surgery once things go bad.
The "skilled", "famous" and "influential" scientists in cancer research spend almost all their time fighting for grants, undermining each other, jockeying for influence, exaggerating their own importance, publishing phony papers etc.
Underpaid novices, trainees, grad students, and postdocs with little prior experience do the actual work in the lab.
It is much, much worse than a reasonable person would imagine!
Why is it impossible to find another resolution that satisfies both the homeowner and ecologists?
PS. I know of a similar problem - where some giant oak trees along a house are so dense that the owners have to use artificial lighting in their rooms during the summer at just about all times,
The trees are owned by the township but reach well over the property and are clearly too big, half as big trees would suffice, the township does not allow trimming the trees without a legal fight
Why should someone be deprived of natural light in their own home? Just cut back on the tree; it is not the end of the world or Mother Nature.