mb7733

> Corporations, when first developed, took out large chunks of Asia before anyone could stop them.

What do you mean by this?

Every graphql API I've ever seen returns JSON. It's definitely the standard. What are you referring to?

>Having said that, plenty of extremely profitable organizations masquerade (literally and figuratively) as non-profits.

That's not a contradiction. A non-profit can be profitable. The profit just needs to be reinvested back into the mission of the organization.

This has nothing to do with trained cold water swimmers. Your figure is just completely off. 15C water does not kill people in three minutes. It does not cause cardiac arrest. An average person could last hours at that temperature. See the well cited link I provided.

Lying to people to try and encourage safe behaviour isn't wise. The truth is good enough.

Your general point is totally valid -- cold water is dangerous. But your survival times for 15C are ridiculously pessimistic. 15C is just not that cold! The table here shows longer expected survival times than that even at 0C:

https://seagrant.umn.edu/programs/recreation-and-water-safet...

Survival even without floatation at 15C is measured in hours.

Totally agree, the actual theme of the film is pretty timeless. I was just entertaining the "obsolescence" debate

Fair enough, but health and fitness are not just for sport and culture. It's practical; you don't want your astronauts to have medical emergencies in space. Similarly, if you put resources into training them you'd rather they didn't die at 30 due to poor genetics.

If any new tech threatens to render the premise obsolete, it's robotics. Not sending humans to space in the first place avoids the issue of selecting astronauts at all.

From what I remember the film didn't focus on intelligence. The main character suffers from genetic disorders that affect his health and lifespan, plus discrimination based on his 'invalid' status. All of that is still very relevant regardless of any progress with AGI.

> The market for Pi is dead. The article pretends that you can buy a pi for list price $5 or whatever LOL but I just checked Amazon and real humans are paying $170 to $205 for a pi.

What is your definition of a dead market?

The point is that you get significantly more 'drift' by just moving east or west within a timezone. No government is going to care if the local time at solar noon at a certain location changes a few seconds over the years, given that the time at solar noon changes much more as you move throughout the timezone.

> If they do "abolish" leap-seconds, they have to "abolish" UTC as well, because UTC is defined based on leap-seconds. Any new timescale without leap-seconds needs a new name. Otherwise you get the same problem we made with GMT: "Do you mean 14:03 UTC before 2035, or 14:03 UTC after 2035

If they just stopped adding leap seconds to UTC at some point, why would there be any ambiguity about the definition of any given UTC time?

> So lets call the new timescale NTS. Lots of records and timestamps have been made using UTC. So now we'll need a way of converting timestamps between UTC and NTS. We already have future timestamps in UTC; e.g. "This record must be destroyed at midnight UTC, Jan 1 2036". So even after we've switched to NTS, we'll still need to calculate UTC, so we'll still need leap-second announcements.

The schedule of leap seconds in the future isn't known, so such a timestamp isn't precisely defined yet anyway. Abolishing the practice fixes this.

Same here, I was super confused. As a workaround you can put the site into dark mode at the top right.

They said they are in the US.

The fact that exploits exist doesn't imply that using sandboxes is equivalent to running untrusted code directly.

But the client side code in a web-app is run within the browser sandbox, which is not equivalent to running a random exe... Unless you meant something else?

I'm not that impressed with the ChatGPT output. I see one or two one routine grammar errors ChatGPT fixed for you, but overall its version reads worse than your original. (A regular grammar checker could catch these mistakes just as well.)

For example, it took your perfectly good:

>I am not a native English speaker (as many of you already noticed due to my grammar mistakes), ...

And replaced it with

> As a non-native English speaker (as many of you have likely noticed due to my grammar mistakes), ...

While a lot of native speakers would write something like this, it's awkward and incorrect. You didn't mean to say "As you may have noticed, as a non native speaker, blah blah", you meant to say "As you may have noticed, I am not a native speaker."

He immigrated in '71, invention was "late 70s".

Is there any evidence that this has gotten any worse over time? Planck's principle[0] is nothing new.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle?wprov=sfl...

> While AR aims to enable display and interaction with the real world but with augmentations, MR aims to bring virtual objects into the real world and allow you to interact with those.

Would you mind giving user-facing examples to illustrate the difference? As in something you consider AR but not MR and vice-versa.

I've googled a bit but I don't understand the distinction between "enable display and interaction with the real world but with [virtual] augmentations" and "bring virtual objects into the real world and allow you to interact with them". As someone with little AR/VR/MR experience these sound like two ways of phrasing the same thing. Thanks!

> No one is gonna see "pa" and think it's pronounced "paw", and no one is gonna hear you say "paw" and think the invocation is "pa"

Well consider me a counter example.

Just like this new version of Vite..?

> Now, isn't your reaction, upon reading this, some version of: "Whaaat? Views are not materializations - by definition, they are essentially the opposite of materializations

I'd never heard of dbt before today but from a quick scan of that page it's clear to me what a that 'materialization' is in dbt. It's not the same as a SQL 'materialized view'; it could be a SQL view, an SQL table, a CTE, or a table with extra machinery for incremental updating.

In my experience in software it's common for similar words to be used for different concepts in different contexts. I think the dbt documentation is well done so I don't see a big issue.

Well, yeah, isn't that exactly what the article meant?

I don't follow, why do you consider providing short term stays to tourists a valuable service, but not providing long term housing to residents?

Common in grad level courses that 70% is required to pass

You misunderstand me. I'm not criticizing the axios developers, I'm criticizing downstream developers that blindly deploy new versions to production.

Many of these products are likely commercial based on their comments

All these comments on GitHub are amazing to me. How do you let a new build of your project with a new version of a such a fundamental dependency get deployed to _production_ without being tested first, manually or otherwise?

I've always wondered... Do people really say these words out loud? I've never heard anyone describe themselves as a "Pythonista","Gopher", "Rustacian" etc IRL. But I also don't work a ton with those languages.

I imagine Denali wouldn't be too bad because its base is only at 2000ft and it's not too far from Anchorage. Still a long walk though.

That's two orders of magnitude, but your point stands. I think way fewer children die in car accidents than I imagined.