blast

There are clues in the article.

Here was volume 1 https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/top-10-rare-an...

Last time we got punk rock, maybe something like that will come of it.

> Can you elaborate on what 'twitfuckers' means

It means "twitter.com" plus "my frustration with twitter.com".

> If you're signed in you'd see threads, right?

I shouldn't have to sign in to see threads.

> Do you think it's bad or unreasonable

Yes. I don't buy that bots are the reason for hiding threads. It reminds me of pinterest and linkedin: show a teaser and then turn the screws on the user until they do what you want. It's greedy and crude.

Oh right, the twitfuckers don't display threads anymore. Thanks.

I didn't see that in the OP, are you referencing some other information?

I'd pay to get me one of them particular IOUs.

What I don't understand is why they can't use AI to improve search quality. I'm sure there are tons of reasons, like institutional paralysis, but from an outside perspective it's frustrating because I'd be happy with search that just works.

I use ChatGPT these days largely as a better search. Where Google is flooded with junk, ChatGPT usually answers my question straightforwardly. If it's something important to me, I'll go back to Google to verify that the answer I got wasn't a pure hallucination, and that's usually pretty easy to do now that I have the key details I was missing before.

yes and it seems unscrupulous to take kickback money for this. on the other hand, as someone who has one of these problems, I'd be only too happy to pay an insider to fix it. It's not just the technical problem (account suspension etc.), it's the injustice of the thing in the first place, and then the rage of being put in an endless hell loop.

Isn't that what they call an "externality"?

I couldn't find a transcript on that page.

Is there a transcript?

Those quotes have been cherry-picked to give you that impression, so the article leads with outrage. I didn't think the Economist did that. Note that they sourced those quotes from a country which is still a more conservative society (for understandable reasons - not a criticsm). If they had quotes that bad from the US or the UK you can bet they'd have used them instead.

Oh yes, it's ridiculously unlikely. Just the point is there are lots of ways for the timing to be not a coincidence, yet the death still a suicide.

The timing is suspicious but that doesn't mean it wasn't suicide. If he was determined to kill himself there might be several reasons to do it today. Maybe he wanted to cast suspicion on Boeing. Or maybe he didn't want to testify - could be tons of reasons for that. I have no idea. Just saying the two events could be connected without it being murder.

All the examples I looked at say killed by Israeli airstrike or Israeli sniper.

It's the buzzword for "make an LLM work on custom data" such as a codebase.

HTML: https://kk.org/outofcontrol/contents.php

PDF: https://kk.org/mt-files/books-mt/ooc-mf.pdf

I hope not, but this is likely to get C&D'd by the famously secretive TJs.

Some people read it as a death threat but they mostly seem to be people who dislike him or his politics. To me that seems like it's being exploited for political reasons. Which Garry obviously made easy to do. Not the same thing as an actual death threat though.

The controversy is whether that's an accurate description of what he did.

Stripe too

The issue in this case is (possible) genocide, which is a different question.

Also interesting about Fanon: https://mg.co.za/article/2019-06-06-00-the-radical-afterlive...

What happened there?

Wirth must have adopted the quote (how could he not), but it actually goes back to a clever line by someone introducing him at a conference.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38858993

The joke goes back to Adriaan van Wijngaarden introducing Wirth at a conference in the 1960s. I'd love to see a video of the audience reaction to that one.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Niklaus_Wirth

https://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/2014-July/063519...

Can you tell us what it is?

New tenants have to pay market rate to begin renting. Rent control kicks in after that and prevents the rent from increasing much.

If the other renters had been there for many years, they'd still be paying market rate (plus a bit) from years earlier. That could be a lot less than market rate now.

That's why renters in rent-controlled units tend not to move as much - as market rates go up, your rent gets relatively cheaper over time and that's an incentive to stay put.