I would love to understand what the inputs actually are. Very neat visualization.
7,815 karma · joined July 25, 2016
B) Not a fan. Individual elements are well done but it doesn't feel cohesive to me.
C) Fine/unobjectionable to me.
D) I like these a lot. It feels like they really made the most of the choice of buildings by covering them up with geometric patterns and/or showing the insides.
E) I really hate the backs of these. The back designs of all the others show how the spirit of each historical figure shows up in modern life. This utterly fails to do that for Da Vinci and Curie.
F) These just don't look like banknotes to me, and I don't think the colors look good.
G) Please no.
H) Fronts look good!
I) I'm not sure I like the technology/prey animals on the front.
J) These don't feel like banknotes to me, but I think I might wind up liking them after getting used to them.
(That's pretty normal for a car company - many car brands have a lifestyle department).
- Prosecutors want to go after it because it is much easier to prove than CSA.
- Authoritarians want to go after it because it gives them a chance to get things like ID checks accepted by the public.
- People who genuinely want to prevent CSA focus on it because a large amount of CSAM is made by serial abusers - so capturing producers can prevent future abuse. Additionally, they believe (with good reasons) that CSAM consumption is a gateway to CSA and CSAM production for many people. Further, finding CSAM can be a way to identify and rescue children from abusive situations.
- CSA survivors may advocate for it often feel traumatized not just by the abuse, but by the fact that people might be continuously viewing that abuse.
- Going after it winds up creating digital forensics specialists and task forces, which creates a special interest group within police departments which wants to continue focusing on CSAM but is not set up to do anything about CSA.
I would recommend the podcast Hunting Warhead to anyone interested in learning more about this.
This costs no money to cities and can be rolled out without any political barriers. It will have a small effect.
Public and active transit costs money and requires political buy-in. It will have a large effect but takes time.
- "Do Expected Stock Returns Wear a CAPE": https://rationalreminder.ca/podcast/146
- "What about Warren Buffet?": https://rationalreminder.ca/podcast/335
My understanding is that this is a statement of how confident we are in the evidence that smoked meats and sausages are carcinogenic. Essentially, we are very sure that smoking is very carcinogenic and we are also very sure that smoked meats and sausages are a tiny bit carcinogenic.
- The ways the Fed pursues price stability and the FTC produces antitrust may have a similar effect, but they have a completely different set of skills required by the employees and they lend themselves to different management structures. One is essentially economics research, the other is essentially law enforcement.
- If the cost of doing a crime was higher interest rates, then anyone with low debt could freely commit the crime. Why not simply make the fine proportional to the price impact on consumers (e.g. if you collude to raise prices and make an extra $1 million, you pay a $3 million fine)?
I could imagine a scenario where differences tend to be more substantive than you'd expect because of how less frequent words with fine distinctions in meaning - the very words that make the document special - may be embedded in the vector space.
No one here is getting arrested for doing a normal at-home bris, even if it's technically illegal.
One of the mohels was from the US, it was viewed as asking for US citizens to have special treatment in the Belgian legal system.
As stated in the article, the whole point is for use in ready-to-drink coffee manufacturing.
That would be a boon for Germany in my book. If you wanted AI results you could go use an AI.