SamBam

Huh, I've literally never heard of someone before thinking it's supposed to be a library that you return books to. Must be different attitudes in different places. I've always seen people treat it as a swap-shop. Take some books you want, and some other day drop off some books you want to give away.

Hmmm, so if I wanted to assemble the lovely Cloud City, all I would need is 697 of my best friends to call in and report that they had lost a different piece...

Sure, but how do you honestly know that? Is it based on the profile of the person you see looking through them? Some people don't look like they should be readers? Or the fact that the "good ones" -- the ones that people presumably want to read -- get taken?

I guess I'm happier not getting angry over things that I don't know for sure, I'm happier generally assuming the best of my neighbors, and I accept that the books are out of my control once I drop them off at the library.

I don't understand the meaning of the word "stolen" in this context.

I've never seen a LFL with explicit rules on who can or cannot take out the books, or what they're allowed to do with the books afterward.

If someone sees "all the good books," are they not allowed to want all the good books? What if they take them and don't get around to reading them, are they stealing them?

I understand that there's a potential tragedy of the commons with a LFL, but if I put some of my books in one, am not going to worry about whether they're being read the "right" way. Mostly I'm happy to have had a place to donate my books, and figure there's a non-zero chance they'll be read again.

Honestly it doesn't take too long to learn how to cook properly on other types of pans. I use my cast iron pans for nearly everything. I have stainless steel for the rest. There is nothing I can't do in them.

So if I understand right, this image of a T-Rex [1] would be wrong, because its palms are facing downward, while this image of a T-Rex [2] would be right because its palms are in a "clapping" posture?

But I'm still a little confused. Most quadrupeds have their front toes facing forward, right? If the first T-Rex did a belly-flop and caught itself on its palms, they'd be facing forward like a dog's. If the second T-Rex did a belly flop, its toes would be facing outward, like Charlie Chaplin's feet.

1. https://geppettostoybox.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/trex....

2. https://s3.envato.com/files/471149443/Realistic%20Trex%20Din...

Is that an iPhone thing? On Android airplane mode turns off both Wi-Fi and Bluetooth.

I came here to ask the same thing. Students in my district put their phones in Yondr pouches every day. No one removes the case.

I played it with my wife on the couch over many winters evenings, and then ten years later played it with my daughter. Good times. Reminded me of playing Sierra games as a kid.

Ah, hunting the serial number led me to discover that the clock is part of a centrally-synchronized wireless clock system. The company is discontinued, so who knows how old these are. So I'm going to hunt down a wireless transmitter somewhere in the building that is setting my clock four minutes fast... Oh well, I don't get to try out OP's cool tech!

I have a big old analog radio-controlled clock in my classroom, and it's always about 4 minutes fast, which would drive me nuts except most of my students can't read analog time so they're never confused by it.

Regardless, I'm excited to try this out next time I'm in the classroom. I'm a little confused by time zones, however. My clock has no controls on the back whatsoever (at least that I can find, I haven't opened it up), so I assume it doesn't know what time zone I'm in.

So do I need to set the time zone on the station emulator? There's an "offset" setting, but it says it's only for correcting "minor errors."

These days the vast majority of the (at least, English-speaking) web is only on a few dozen websites. The 80-20 rule would get you pretty far for most users' daily interactions.

As a science teacher and former software dev, I find this totally cute, and I understand exactly why the creator chose to make it a physical card game.

That said, I do think the translation into a physical card game means that kids aren't getting the experimentation and near-instant feedback that they'd be getting if they were doing this digitally.

In order for a kid to "win," they either have to already know, or explicitly be told using words, what all of the commands do. Then they have to hear the parent analyze their solution, and tell them where they went wrong. Picture, however, a different game, played online: A kid has no idea what "sort" does, but when they link the "sort" command to a blob of text, all the lines are sorted in order. Now no one has told them what this command does, but they've discovered it. By playing the role of a scientist discovering these commands, they might actually gain an intuitive understanding of them.

I'm thinking of the board game "robot turtle," where kids needed to create a "program" of commands to move a turtle to a goal. When they did that, they had near-instantaneous feedback: the parent moved the turtle. If the kid mixed up their left with the robot's left, the failure was obvious. But if the game has been re-made so that there was no board, and the parent and kid just needed to talk about whether the turtle would actually end up seven paces forward and three paces to the left -- i.e. doing it all verbally -- it wouldn't have been nearly as powerful.

So I'm not raining on this, I can see this as very cool. But I am having a hard time imagining it's the best way to learn to pipe together commands.

I came to say the same thing: I love the idea of the quick escape, but some of the sites take way too long to load. They should prioritize sites with the fastest loading (smallest footprint) over some of the jokey-er websites like "43 Gifts for Every Type of Boss."

> "Why are we only allowed to have sex when you want it?"

> "Um, no honey, we both have to want to have sex in order for us to have sex."

> "Exactly, so men are only allowed to have sex when women want it. Access to sex is strictly controlled by the woman."

Two fundamentally different ways of looking at the same thing. Why did he feel like it ought to be any other way?

I really disagree with the label brainrot. Brainrot is low-quality garbage with no artistic merit, and very little thought behind its creation, which does nothing but make you briefly pause while scrolling, before scrolling away with no lasting impression being done to your mind (besides increased boredom and inability to focus).

This is clearly an artistic statement, whether you like the art or not. A ton of thought and time was put into it. And people will likely be thinking and discussing this video for some time to come.

Long before the racism thing, I remember how grossed out I was by him complaining that he only got to have sex when his girlfriend wanted it, therefore his girlfriend, and women in general, were the "gatekeepers" of sex.

Completing failing to recognize that consent is a two person affair.

You said almost no viewers. I'm pointing out that the GitHub website has a built-in viewer.

If you're looking at the code locally, what editor do you use that doesn't have a markdown viewer? I use Sublime with MarkdownLivePreview. Although honestly I generally don't, because md is so easy to read without a viewer.

Our ventless dryer is great. Maybe it takes 50% longer, but we're not running multiple loads a day so who cares? Smaller to medium sized electric ventless dryers are the most efficient dryers out there. (Of course we also just use clothes racks to dry stuff.)

And they immediately fixed the lag?

I've always assumed that's either the corn syrup or something else that's in the American version, because I swear growing up in Italy I never noticed this.

Haven't done a side-by-side comparison, though, so maybe it's just my memory of my childhood tastebuds.

> You find MD files in every open-source project and lots of other places, but almost no viewers

Huh? Any open-source project on GitHub, at least, has the viewer right there. It's the default view of markdown files. I assume other repos are similar.

E.g. The readme https://github.com/jquery/jquery

And yet I suspect it's super effective, because of the powerful illusion of it being real people.

There's the classic search "hack" of adding site:reddit.com to any product recommendation search, to find "real" recommendations.

Most of the time this is going to find 5-10 posts, each with only a dozen comments and a dozen up-votes. And yet it feels do much more real than whatever at the top of Google that many people will trust these reviews.

30 seconds is indeed the _original_ Aeropress recommended brew time. [1] You're supposed to mix the grounds and start plunging nearly immediately, finishing in about 30 seconds. So, indeed, much of the water passes through even before 30 seconds.

That was way too short. It looks like they've finally updated the instructions somewhat, now recommending 60 seconds before starting to plunge. [2]

It works because they also recommend a very fine grind, but that's still pretty short. It looks like Counter Culture recommends using regular pour-over grind and the inverted method and 2-3 minutes, [3] which happens to also be what I do. Though I'm not really particular, so long as it's somewhere between about 1.5 and 3.5 minutes. (Breakfast is a hectic time while also handling kids...)

1. https://www.seattlecoffeegear.com/pages/product-resource/aer...

2. https://aeropress.com/pages/how-to-use

3. https://counterculturecoffee.com/blogs/counter-culture-coffe...

Is there a model on Fal.ai that would make it easy to sharpen blurry video footage? I have found some websites, but apparently they are mostly scammy.

The issue is the they always say "Here's the final, correct answer" before they've written the answer, so of course the LLM has no idea if it's going to be right before it starts, because it has no clue what it's going to say.

I wonder how it would do if instead it were told "Do not tell me at the start that the solution is going to be correct. Instead, tell me the solution, and at the end tell me if you think it's correct or not."

I have found that on certain logic puzzles that it simply cannot get right, it always tells me that it's going to get it quite "this last time," but if asked later it always recognizes its errors.

> You just behave like a normal person.

?? I'm a normal person, and I don't need to count my days in and out of a country, I just take vacations when I like.

If OP did that, they'd lose their visa.

It sounds like you've never known anyone on a green card, or waiting for citizenship, or on a visa that requires a certain number of days in the country.

> To apply for British citizenship, you need to prove you were physically in the UK on your application date but five years ago.

This is an insane bureaucratic requirement (to have been in the country exactly 5 years on the day prior), and not someone the vast majority of people need to worry about. How does "just behave like a normal person" help keep you on the right side of multiple overlapping Kafkaesque requirements?

Yup. It's the colons after every paragraph's first sentence:

> It worked because it solved a real problem: Kenyans were already sending money through informal networks. M-PESA just made it cheaper and safer.

> Here’s why this matters: M-PESA created a payment rail with near-zero transaction costs.

> The magic is this: You’re not buying a $1,200 solar system.

> It gets even better: there are people who will pay for credits beforehand.

It's just again and again and again. It's sounds 100% ChatGPT.

Maybe this is 100% written by hand by someone who reads too many ChatGPT-generated articles. Possibly the author just spends a ton of time chatting with ChatGPT and have picked up its style. Or it's just more AI-written than OP wants to admit.

No, it sounds like the author is well aware of that, and is instead just trying to get a read on what the gov's various systems are saying about him, so he can stay well within buffers of that.

He explicitly says that none of his data on the app would convince an official.

While "isn’t just wrong — it’s profoundly counterproductive" does sound pretty AI-ish, "his eccentrically rational mind" definitely does not. So either an AI was used to help write this, or we try to remember that AI has this tone (and uses emdashes) precisely because real people also write like this.