boublepop

Calling the oldest trade in the world “late stage capitalism” seems kind of humorous. There’s nothing fundamentally new with OF, except scaling, and it’s not dead in the many places that have both legal prostitution and casual bars are everywhere.

Though for 80-90% og cases out there you seriously don’t need k8s, and when the small internal IT dept that used to “manage” a dozen virtual machines starts talking about “need to keep up with the times and use new tech” what they are really saying is “let’s gamble infrastructure stability on my personal self education in k8s for my next job” and it’s perfectly reasonable to give them a hard no.

There are products and studies now with Liraglutide and semaglutide, which show consistent and maintainable weight loss, but neither has been on the market for 5 years yet afaik, and the longest study only ran for 2 yearsit seems. Though it seems likely sustainable results from a 2 year study will hold for 5 years.

https://www.europeanpharmaceuticalreview.com/news/165203/weg...

It’s not. Mathematica is extremely flexible yes, but it’s not hindering optimization. You can literally parallelize code and compile to c automatically.

Sounds like the typical case of someone not understanding Mathematica. The 40min -> 5sec speed up can typically be achieved in Mathematica just by changing 1 to 1. The default is slower but always completely accurate, which is important for math, but less so for most numerical scripts.

If that fails Mathematica can also just compile your script for you.

Technically I guess their are selling links to public domain images as NFTs which seems fair. I mean why would you not be allowed to link to public domain images?

> Cool, you don’t want to buy video games skins that way - who cares?!?

This isn’t about micro transactions, you don’t need or even use NFTs for that. Replace NFT with gambling and it should make sense.

Many people don’t like it when video games try to build gambling merchanisms into them. And saying “its not gambling its NFTs” is like trying to get around a ban with a defense of “No it wasn’t a death threat, it was a haiku”.

Now obviously gambling exists both in games and real life, and you’ll find people who support it on both sides of the fence, but for many who it still feels like abuse of the weak of mind, and should be heavily regulated and penalized on the business side.

It’s a process circus. Once something gets raised as a critical IT issue in a large org, it’s not enough to “just fix the problem” or state that you aren’t affected due to network security etc. You have to report about it, which means you likely need a comment from a vendor.

The most humorous thing for me about this entire situation is that the way reporting is handle in many orgs is:

Central IT: Are we vulnerable in system X?

System owner: writes vendor

Vendor: No we are not vulnerable to that CVE, we are using Log4J V1

System owner: … the one that’s eol 2015, and has a bunch of other CVE’s including another RCE?

Vendor: yes

System owner:Are you going to issue an upgrade?

Vendor: No, we are not vulnerable to the latest CVE on V2 so we will not.

System vendor to central IT: They are using log4j V1, so not affected by the latest CVE, but we are vulnerable to other CVEs including RCE.

Central IT: Perfect, we’ll mark it down as no issues then, the Issue handling only covers the latest CVE.

There’s a story about two stock brokers walking down wall street, one of them spots something on the ground and goes: “Look, a hundred dollar bill on the ground!”, the other responds: “That’s impossible, if there was a hundred dollar bill on the ground, someone would have picked it up”

While it’s not possible to predict exact movements of stocks, that doesn’t mean that finance isn’t filled with situations where someone drops money on the ground. It never stays there for long because someone picks it up, but you’ll certainly never be the one picking up anything if you don’t look.

I mean obviously I wasn’t doing moderate swimming, I was fighting for the top places in swim.com at the pools I was swimming in, and the number is low, and my weight is different but let’s use it and show my point. Assuming 3500 kcal per lb of fat and ignoring all other details.

If you do 1h a week for half a year you are potentially at about 3 Lb or 2% body mass loss.

If you however you do 2h each weekday you are close to a potential loss of 30 Lb or 20% of weight.

Now obviously you could argue that the first case won’t work to lose weight and that you’ll just subconsciously eat a bit more to offset it, and the outcome isn’t even that large to begin with and would disappear in fluctuations of your weight unless you are consistent about hydration levels and food intake prior to stepping on the scale. But in the second case you will definitely end up changing your weight even without changes to your diet.

I was doing meal prep both before and after, so I can attest to the fact that I didn’t change my diet down to the g amount of skyr I was eating at lunch. So no, I didn’t subconsciously change my diet.

Yes, and you could be a sysadmin at a university commenting on the dwindling share of Macs on campus arguing that it proves Apple is becoming irrelevant…

I feel like claims that Mathematica is dying fall in the same category as people who claim that Apple must be dying because hardly anyone uses Macs compared to PC’s, and they don’t even have the majority of the mobile or tablet market. All the while they are reaching the first 3T market cap.

Mathematica isn’t trying to be the cheap solution that everyone used, it’s the expensive but extremely high quality product that’s only used by those who are willing to pay. And they are doing quite well financially.

> And, yes, you need to exercise to stay healthy, but you shouldn’t expect to see big changes on the bathroom scale with that.

Anecdotally and n=1, but I highly doubt this assertion. I lost significant weight without a diet change going from little exercise to swimming 2km 5 times per week.

I think what give people the impression of exercise not affecting the scale is that a little exercise won’t show. If you do yoga once per week, you might have the mindset of “I’m active, I do yoga, why aren’t I losing weight?” But it’s just not that much when you calculate the calories. Even at 10km of swimming a week, it’s not like I was shredding the weight instantly. I was maybe losing a bit more than 500g per week, which isn’t even significant enough to show if you aren’t consistent about weighing at the same hydration level, but over a couple of months and staying at that level it definitely shows. Now in comparison most others I know who casually swim would do maybe 400m once a week at a comfortable pace. That’s enough that you answer in a question are that “yes, I’m active, I swim each week” but not enough that you’ll significantly change your weight from it.

I think the saying shouldn’t be “you can’t outrun a bad diet” should really just be “you have to run a hell of a lot more than you think to outrun a bad diet”

That is a pretty weird perspective. If a flash mob stormed your home and stole 0.07% of your yearly income, I’m pretty sure you’d consider it a problem even if the relative amount isn’t higher.

Or sending out a tweet about covfefe.

It sounds like this study has a series of problems. No control group, no reference measurement, no predefined hypothesis, and it doesn’t seem to mention number of participants, unless I missed it suggesting that it’s a small number.

From this read I doubt it would replicate under stricter experimental conditions and with more rigor.

Edit: Oh and I forgot that the noted effect being equated with creativity is somewhat unreliable. Essentially they where given a math problem that randomly seems to also give an answer you can find in the number itself, but anyone would know that this can’t be relied upon and might lead to errors if you just assume that’s the answer. That is unless your unfocused or just less logical. They could repeat the test and replace the sleep element with getting drunk and they would likely see an effect.

> The most noticeable struggle is the player’s exploration speed, which will cause her to wake up when walking fast for too long.

> The exploration speed restriction serves the implicit goal of the game, which is to unearth beauty.

I wonder if this actually works as expected. My first thought is that this sounds like either a “push your luck” mechanic or just a frustration akin to all those game interfaces with “beautiful transitions” that just make you annoyed because every menu press has a 2 second delay.

I haven’t played the game so I can’t say one way or the other or if this nails it and gets the desired effect. If anyone has I would love to your perspective.

There’s a difference between marketing material and fraudulent claims made to investors.

You won’t get far claiming that your perpetual motion machine was just “filmed under ideal conditions” aka, hiding the magnet or air blower providing the energy to fight dissipation.

That is a quite naive question to be honest. You might as well had asked Zuckerberg why Facebook isn’t open source.

If you read the original waterfall methodology descriptions, even waterfall isn’t supposed to be what waterfall turns into in organizations.

I think your point has been pretty thoroughly proven wrong by tether, which started out as just a claim without evidence that they had a 1:1 backing of USD to USDT, and then later provided evidence that they did in fact not ever have that, and still now only have “cash equivalents” that no one is of cause allowed to see audits of.

Given that Tether, wether fraud or not, managed to print 1.5B without evidence of that in any way being tied to real USD deposits, I think we can safely say that claims without evidence are a lot lore than just hand waving.

> the TikTok Algorithm Knew My Sexuality Better Than I Did,” reads one in a series of headlines about people marveling at the app’s X-ray of their inner lives.

I think its disingenuous to describe it like that. The concept is so simple that it’s absolutely mundane. The app isn’t X-raying your life. It’s just measuring how long you look at a video, and if you press like or comment. It’s brain dead simple, and the only reason so many are astonished by it is because they assume that spending 20 min looking at half naked people of one or the other gender won’t affect the suggestions “because I didn’t press like or comment” but obviously it can still tell that after being shown the same content for 20 min straight, your still not scrolling by, and will keep suggesting it to you because of that.

Yea, they back the value through the crypto they buy using part of what they minted. It’s a brilliant strategy that can never fail because crypto fundamentally can only go up…

Its also illegal to make weapons yourself. “You can’t prevent it” is a silly standpoint to argue from. Should you make it legal for American school children to shoot their classmates simply because apparently the country can’t prevent it? No of cause not.

Crypto isn’t just math, and it’s subject to law just like everything else.

I’ve always wondered about the whole “obesity is a choice, they just lack willpower”-crowd, what they would use to explain the drastic increase in “lack of willpower”, because it seems odd that this should just suddenly change so much over a relatively short time period. But from this study it could seem like maybe the simple explanation is the most direct one. Is the obesity epidemic just caused by the rise of TV enabling a specific lifestyle of large excess calorie while sedative? And if such a link is confirmed, will we see Netflix, Disney, Apple, along with flow tv provides penalized in the same way that tobacco companies have been? Both are personal choices, damaging to your health? It’s a fun line of thinking. Entirely speculative of cause, and ignoring tons of complexity, but fun non the less, I remember as a child my parents told me to not spend too much time in front of the TV “or my eyes would become square”, maybe they should have been saying “don’t spend too much time in front of the TV or you’ll become obese”.

The intro reads like:

As a salesman who’s been able to survive the pandemic thanks to selling multilevel marketing schemes, honestly nothing is bad about them per say.

I don’t understand why it is that people have this inherent attitude that “it’s good when artists get money, no matter what”. I mean fair enough if you sell some art, but that’s not what NFTs are, they are risky investments bought because of the investment aspect. And while yes, as they say “in an up market there are no losers” it still might be the case that the losers will show if it collapses just like any Ponzi scheme or pyramid organization, and that will leave all the “suckers” at a loss. And I can’t agree that this is all ok simply because the snake oil salesmen where also artists this time around and not just selling certificates allowing others to sell water filters.

Double taxation is when one entity is taxed double, not when multiple independent entities are taxed based on value being transferred. I also pay tax on my income before I pay it to a company for their services, but they still need to pay tax on that money.

It’s not a tax on the business. If Elon musk is forced to sell a percentage of his shares in Tesla that’s not going to change their bottom line, it just means someone else, other than him is buying that ownership.

It’s a tax on the billionaires just like it’s intended, and they are forced to either pay themselves a salary that will also be taxed, just like poor people, in order to pay the capital gains tax. They can’t just borrow money against their gains and pretend that it’s fair that they don’t pay any taxes “because Elon Musk has no income”.

> All those charitable things done for free will be stopped.

Are you kidding? They clashes might be free for kids, but they can get charity donations, governmental donations, and it’s essentially a “buy our product” class. It’s great value for minor expense.