duped

I mean it's not hard to have an annoying KYC experience. When I opened an LLC there were some dumb hoops to get a bank account opened with Chase.

But I also appreciate that bankers should be liable for supporting terrorists and criminals so I live with it

Niche luxury products aren't exactly mainstream either

I guess preserving the freedoms under the Constitution against ICE is a racial or religious motivation

I think missing from your context is the racial and religious motivations of people that back ICE's current actions. They don't care about the law or reasonable expectations on visa policies.

I mean the insurrectionist Republicans attempted a coup on Jan 6. You think that's an "idea?"

And you think there wasn't some legal process involved in the investigation and conviction? There was and it didn't go far enough.

> So what is the government's sole purpose?

To establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.

> Also this is not the sole purpose of companies.

Friedman disagrees.

> The free market has created everything you use the more we turn the keys over to government's the worse things get.

Which is why we have never needed government regulation of things like food, air, water, shelter, work safety, accessibility, or anything else. The free market provides.

> The government can get infinite power and control though

Which is why in a free society the government is answerable to the people.

beIN also sued the VPNs

> Not more dangerous than rice stir‑frying

It's a lot easier to deal with a small grease fire than vaporized ethanol around an open flame.

> Ethanol is antidot. So again, your chances to severely poison yourself not much higher than if you instead of alcohol were doing Japanese cuisine.

Uh huh that's why all people blinded by bad moonshine are living healthy with full eyesight and no other negative affects, just like people that ate some bad fish

Are you disagreeing that distilling several liters of cask strength grain alcohol around an open flame is more dangerous than sealed containers of propane and gasoline?

It's about as dangerous as eating foraged mushrooms. You know it's a danger before you try it so you go to lengths to avoid it.

> ethanol is incredibly explosive

My friend is a chemist and we both like whiskey so we thought experimented this.

You can speed up the aging of whiskey by increasing the surface area of charred wood. It takes 3 years in a barrel, a couple days (hours? maybe? I'm an engineer not a scientist) if you splinter it into wood chips and char them first and agitate the solution.

What you can't really speed up is the oxidation of the tannins which for all we know (barring experimentation) are a key part of the flavor profile. What you could do is mix in oxidizers like bubbling oxygen through it.

The combination of oxygen and ethanol has a name though: "liquid rocket fuel." The idea of combining heat, ethanol, oxygen, and agitating at bottling volumes sounded kinda scary.

I hope people don't try it at home without knowing what they're doing.

More realistically though, the biggest danger comes from leaky apparatus and an open flame. The horror stories come from home distillation over gas burners. Electric heat is plentiful and home stills would most likely be basically kettles.

I mean whiskey was the first consumer good taxed by the nascent Constitutional republic during his administration and he had to put down a rebellion and federal regulation of distillation was a response to the long-tail impact of that rebellion and failure to enforce the taxation of whiskey and spirits.

Now I think it's dumb to prohibit home distillers and it actually inhibits industry evolution. There is a lot of experimentation that happens in grey areas of the law with homemade spirits and it would be interesting to see how things adapt if the law was lifted.

All that said home distillation is dangerous. Ethanol at volumes sufficient for bottling is explosive, methanol poisoning is real, and even if the techniques for safely distilling it from a mash are learned in a high school chemistry class most people aren't great at it.

I'm a big whiskey enjoyer and home cook and have done a few "dangerous" things myself w/ food and beverages. If the law goes away I know I'm going to do some stuff in the basement and accept the risk myself. But I'm a little wary of laws being lifted that definitely protect people, even if it's a side effect of taxation.

> If you've seen their rocket landing videos the technology is quite similar in nature.

Sure but Tesla is not SpaceX.

I just want to know how they faked it. Because I actually have zero trust that this is a realistic demonstration.

> If you're referencing everything to C you'll never understand the scales and their different fingering patterns.

If you watch someone play a Janko keyboard (1) then you'll notice that there is only one fingering pattern for each tonality or chord, you just shift up or down based on the tonic. Kind of like a guitar, where there are a handful of scale/chord/arpeggio shapes that are picked for efficiency (aka, "economy of motion") and aren't tied to the particular key.

(1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_POoaGecU9w

They deserve to be dunked on so long as they're the ones that keep begging for people to abuse their platform this way

If you cant trust your own machines outputs to build the next version of your code why should any user trust them

Sure but that's a compiler bootstrapping problem. It doesn't answer the question: why do you need to bootstrap the toolchain to build the distro? You can reuse a trusted toolchain that's been safely bootstrapped .

Why do you need to bootstrap a toolchain to bootstrap a distro?

I know this is common but it seems like either an aesthetic decision, or glibc cruft.

It's been out of alpha/beta for almost a year

Another way of describing Turso is a SQLite-compatible (same file format and C API) embedded database. If you start with SQLite but find you need async i/o, concurrent writers, and local replicas then Turso is a good option.

$3 billion dollars from a weirdo that fled to Florida because he was too cheap to pay his taxes, establishing a school to train more weirdos like him, a thousand miles from the actual school and presumably with different curricula/professors/degrees sounds like he's just buying CMU's name for legitimacy on his experimental anti-education project.

This is generally indicative of not having ideas that are worth reading by others. If you can't formulate the idea then you don't have to write about it, because you don't have an idea.

At the end of the day, if your writing is meant to be read by others then using an LLM is a violation of the social contract between you and your audience.

They're essentially closing 343/Halo studios because they had independence for a decade and did nothing but flop.

I just fundamentally do not agree with you. If you are editing AI generated text to "better reflect your ideas and voice" you are still not using your ideas or your voice. There's no 'thinking process in action' if you've delegated the hardest part of the task to a text predictor!

It really bothers me that people think it's ok to use AI as the starting point for writing. In my mind, it's the worst thing you can do. It poisons the entire effort, and frankly it's disrespectful to give it to anyone to read. Stop doing it!

I disagree, the problem is the tool. Generating text instead of thinking about what text to use explicitly is not writing, and it's not worthy of someone else reading it.

Fundamental to exchanging ideas is discovering which ideas should be exchanged and how to express them. The process of writing itself is that exercise. If you use a tool to outsource the thinking then you're not thinking.

PE doesn't create anything. They extract from margins.

It only works by having more capital to begin with.

Otherwise you wouldn't see consolidation where it shouldn't exist.

No, it's money. Younger generations have less money. It's not more complicated than that.

> They like companies with some kind of moat that makes it hard to unseat them.

The biggest moat is capital.

PE is buying up things like medical practices, law firms, vets, etc, where typically there would be an upwards path for one generation to hire new blood to cover their markets and then sell partnership stakes to them when they want to retire. But why should an owner of a practice sell to their junior staff when PE is there offering 2, 3, 5x as much?

Consolidation of these kinds of businesses at the hands of PE is endemic of systemic lack of capital acquisition of a generation of people, held down by debt and concerns about practical shit like healthcare.

PE is just a symptom of larger macro economic trends, namely the depletion of the next generation from free cash they could use to become business owners.

He was a rich asshole who personally wronged everyone on the jury in his first season, and carried by luck/ignorance/Parvati Shallow in his second season. Which stats capture that?