in_cahoots

I run a hobby website and was getting a fair amount of traffic and orders from OpenAI. More than from Google search, in fact. I decided to throw $500 at their ads since they had an offer of $500 free after $500 in ad spend. I went through half of my budget with literally zero ROI before I decided to stop throwing good money after bad.

I'm not sure what the moral here is. Users really hate ads in their free tier? ChatGPT is great at organically surfacing products but terrible at ads? Either way I'm not sure if I'll be using this new feature. Why should I fix what's not broken?

This reads like someone with zero familiarity with divorces or people in general.

- anyone with enough money to be targeted like this has enough money to get a prenup.

- most states do 50-50 custody these days unless one parent gives up their rights. So any child support would be decent, but not life-changing. Doubly so if the guy is rich enough to be targeted, in which case he's also rich enough to hire a good lawyer. The woman in this scenario has less money, so she can't get as strong a lawyer unless she's gambling that he'll have to pay her legal fees.

- With 50-50 custody the woman can't fly out of state to raise the kids, the court frowns on uprooting them from their hometown / school system.

The only way this makes sense is if the guy relinquishes all his rights to the kid, in which case he's hardly a hero either.

This isn't even considering the ridiculous notion that this woman has a man on the side just waiting for her to get knocked up with some millionaire's child.

Yes, this is the concern. Thankfully Google has a 'helpful' AI chatbot / tutor product that students can use instead of search!

Not just universities. If it were universities it wouldn't be so bad since most students have their own laptop and can make their own decisions. This is a play to get AI in the hands of young kids. Most public K-12 schools use Google, so they either have to opt-in to AI and/or their 'helpful' educational chatbot, or not use search at all.

My husband is the same as you. He doesn't want to prolong the inevitable and suffer needlessly. Whether you fight or not, we all die eventually. And he would rather be equanimous with it than rage against it. I admire his courage. And yours.

This happened more than a year ago.

This is the unfortunate truth. I've gone through 2 Withings scales because the battery basically had planned obsolecense. Then I bought a Quardio smart scale, but the company went bankrupt and all cloud syncing went down. Meanwhile my mom's $20 dumb scale works perfectly fine.

These days it's not true that if you pay for the item, you're the customer. Now you're just a potential revenue stream.

I do something similar: trace a rectangle and subdivide it into 20 smaller rectangles. Then I slide the smaller rectangles to one side. The part that's missing (divided by 19) is the kerf.

My 50W Omtech Polar Plus (since discontinued) can do 3mm in one pass and 6mm in two passes (or one pass near max power but I prefer two for reduced charring and to extend the lifecycle of the laser).

Basically any 50W Chinese laser should get you what you want. But at that price point you can't adjust the mirrors, no red dot to guide cuts, poor camera calibration etc. It's worlds away from what I expect you get with an Epilog.

Normally when people say side effects they mean things that you can actually observe. Hence your earlier point about going off the meds and noticing a difference. If I don't notice any difference other than I don't think your point really stands.

Been on hormonal birth control for 20 years. I've stopped twice to get pregnant. No side effects. I don't know why you're so confident here.

I follow some homeschooling communities as a way to learn how to supplement my kids' schooling. There are many interwoven communities: * religious families who don't want their kids exposed to the secular world * families who don't trust adults to watch their kids and wouldn't ever consider public school, summer camp, sleepovers etc. * families whose kids aren't being served by the public school system.

In all three scenarios (but especially in the first two) there is a sizeable population of parents who know their kid is several years behind grade level, but they tolerate it because they think kids learn at different paces. Or that it's fine for a kid to love one particular thing (cooking, machine repair, art) at the expense of a well-rounded education. And that's not even getting into the 'unschoolers' who treat never opening a textbook as a point of pride.

If you're well-educated and run in circles of people like you then you'll find the homeschoolers who also value education. But if you expose yourself to a wider variety of people your conclusions may change.

I read one of those papers. Only between 10% and 25% of homeschool families completed the test. And that's of families that could be located because they had previously interacted with major homeschool testing companies; there isn't a national list of homeschooled kids and many parents homeschool precisely to avoid standardized testing. Plus in many cases the parents were the proctors. This is hardly a robust finding.

If the bill defines a charge cycle as 100->0->100 then the restriction should be more meaningful right? Manufacturers would have to ship a larger battery and cap its capacity to get the same lifespan.

Are you bringing in at least $1.25M in additional yearly revenue to your company?

Imagine if it were Comcast instead of Claude. Comcast gives you 750GB of data a month. Now they decide that visiting HN 'counts' as 750GB and either shut you off or bill you extra. Is that price discrimination or changing the terms after the fact?

Have you tried one of these edutech apps? They're mind-numbingly boring and move at a snails pace. Meanwhile YouTube is lurking in the background. And if that's locked down you can always chat with your friends in a Google Doc (trust me, it happens). And the teacher now has to babysit 25 kids rather than actually developing a class that might be more engaging.

There's no comparison with an engaging Youtube lecture.

My father introduced this book to me when I was around 10. I will forever be grateful.

https://www.worldofbooks.com/products/calculus-the-easy-way-...

Yes, I've doomed him all because of a 30 minute interaction. Just like when he watched Kerbal Space Program videos on YouTube he lost all motivation to get to the moon himself. Oh wait.

And he definitely doesn't make up missions using the mission builder using if / then loops. He'll never learn to code. Oh the humanity.

I'd rather have my kid typing on a real keyboard into Claude, asking questions about what Python, and modifying the Claude-generated code than watching random videos and playing Roblox on his iPad.

The Buffy revival was just canned this weekend, so I wouldn't get too optimistic here.

My elementary schooler did this with pictures of his stuffed animals last week. I helped a little bit, but most of it was Claude. He's never coded before.

Interesting, this is a trap that I've seen multiple senior hires fall into. In my experience "we have a problem but no solution" often means (a) there actually is a solution but it's too expensive to implement, (b) there are organizational reasons why this problem exists and a new hire doesn't have the experience or credibility to navigate it or (c ) there is no solution to the problem or the solution is very complex, and by the time the new hire onboards, digs into the problem, and figures it out their credibility is shot because everyone was expecting the senior hire to figure it out in 90 days.

I've found new hires to be more successful when they join, get some easy wins, and then find their own problems to solve. But maybe it's just an artifact of working at large companies where most of the day-to-day stuff is figured out.

We got my son a Mac Mini when he was 6. I was surprised at how many kid games just didn't work with the Mac, or how many did work but didn't support an external microphone and camera. I guess since most young kids have iPads or Chromebooks there's no market.

Anthropic isn't against weaponizing AI, it's just against two specific carve outs for now. They happily accepted the Pentagon's money so long as it was only spying on other countries. And now that the leopard is eating their face they're claiming the moral high ground.

It's entirely possible for both Anthropic and OpenAI to be in the wrong here. This is a massive publicity win but it doesn't make them heroes in my book.

The transactions are logged but access is also logged and restricted. Messing around in a financial dataset and associating actual names with ids without a document reason is a good way to get fired at any reasonably-sized company.

The social aspect is a part of it, but it's just the tip of the iceberg. So much of how we fundamentally see the world- the role of the individual vs society, luck vs skill vs determination as being important for success, what defines a 'happy' life- is determined by our own conditioning. By seeing someone else's perspective you start to appreciate that there aren't many 'first principles' in life.

Take a simple example, marriage. If you're a Millennial you were probably brought up to think marriage is for love, and should produce kids. Depending on your orientation and enculturation, the wife is 'supposed' to stay at home or 'supposed' to have a career. We don't question the basic outlines of what a marriage looks like, unless you happen to be a part of the polyamory or fundamental religious communities, in which case you probably take those standards as being the ideal.

My husband's entire family had arranged marriages. Seeing their relationships gave me a new perspective on what a marriage can be, and forced us to be intentional about what parts of our culture we bring along. It's not that we're doing marriage 'better' than anyone else, but when you can't assume anything about what a marriage looks like you have to really examine it in detail.

I agree mostly. But I would push back on the idea that you need to let your child do whatever (play on Roblox, get fancy clothes or toys, etc) because of bullying. You're trading one set of potential problems for another set of known problems, and letting your own fears dictate how you raise your kids. How do you expect your kids to stand up to peer pressure as teenagers if you give into their peers when they are younger?

I get it. We all look back at the pain from our childhoods and try to shield our kids from that pain. But unless you want your kid to be average in every way there's going to be a chance of bullying. Focus on building a strong relationship with them so that you can guide them through it if it happens.

On the contrary, developing a deep relationship with someone very different than myself (different religions, native languages and countries, socioeconomic class, race, gender) has shown me the lies I've been telling myself all my life.

It's easy to identity lies and hypocrisy in others. But the brain has all sorts of tricks to prevent it from looking inwards; at least for me it prefers feeling rewarded to deep self-criticism. Finding someone who sees me and will happily call me on my assumptions, conditioning, and BS has been a great gift.

To be fair, I didn't read that suggestion as being about a possible placebo effect, just that you can't attribute any one good day to the pill. It's like climate change- it undeniably exists, but you can't blame climate change for a single heat wave or freak storm.

Of that list my kids' top-rated K-8 public school only offers music. Everything else is done privately.