sovnade

There's plenty of good laptops out there not made by apple. Dell XPS 13 is excellent, asus has several zenbook models that are on par, etc. They don't get much media coverage because the standards we expect from laptops are so high now that we take it for granted (0.75" thick or less, all day battery, insanely high pixel density (enough to require scaling), fast enough cpu/memory for any day to day task, great screen brightness, 512gb-2tb+ nvme ssds, generic charger ports (usb-c), etc. You can get all of that for under $1k from several makers now.

2560x1920 for a 17" screen is perfectly fine. It's about on par with modern macbooks.

is that not enough for a 17"?

I don't have that many on my 27" desktop monitors and it's totally fine.

Holding a monopoly and engaging in anti-competitive behavior are entirely different.

The app store being closed and not allowing 3rd party stores would be considered anti-competitive. They have a 100% monopoly on the ios application market.

I don't think they're doing much anti-competitive in the phone hardware space though.

It's amazing how much our brain does in the background to smooth out processing because it can't handle all of the data coming in. This example several others (the one where you look at the center dot and all others disappear - briefly mentioned in this twitter thread also, the one where you stare between two sets of rapidly updating photos of celebrities..but after a few, your brain gives up and just sort of makes them all look like ogres, etc).

Awesome stuff and I will always do every one of these silly things.

Not until we can figure out the storage problem, which is not batteries.

Pumping water with excess power up into a reservoir to later use for hydro power, or something along those lines, is likely the only "battery" big enough to power a country.

We can re-use nuclear waste now. Something like 90% of "waste" can be recycled and reused. It's not like we're just shoving it in yucca mountain anymore.

It started to wane slightly after 2 months. It was still nearly 100% effective at that point. It was still highly effective at 6 months (85%+), which is when a booster would return it to full effectiveness.

Yes - in science, definitions change all the time. We redefined what a planet was and booted Pluto out of the group.

Which part of the new definition do you disagree with as being a valid definition for a modern vaccine? And what difference does it make functionally? The covid vaccines were a product that gave you protection against a disease. Everyone knows that's what a vaccine is. I don't see why it matters what the definition on the site was to begin with.

And now it's more accurate - there's plenty of vaccines out there previously that weren't 100% effective, so there's no reason to have the absolute language out there. The measles vaccine is only 97% effective after 2 doses - so that wouldn't have met the old definition either.

edit: sorry i'm rereading your post and I'm not even sure what your issue is with the current definition

Remember Delta wasn't even around until late summer. Biden's speech was barely an exaggeration at the time when we were dealing with the original strain. Was it 100% effective at preventing all infection entirely? No. It was 100% effective in preventing severe symptoms, hospitalization, and death, and was 95% effective in preventing symptoms entirely. 95% reduction in infection and 100% reduction in death is close enough to round up for a non-technical speech.

It was extremely effective against preventing infection (and transmission). The press release you posted said as much. But everything I heard at the time was that it was 100% effective at preventing severe infections (including hospitalizations and death), and that you were much, much less likely to have symptoms at all should you contract it.

And this was mostly true from the original strain back in early 2021. The vaccine reduced the ability to contract and spread the virus dramatically. The chances of contracting and spreading the original strain, if you were fully vaccinated, was close enough to zero to say it basically wasn't happening.

Delta obviously changed that, and omicron has changed it much more.

No official body has ever said "you will not get covid if you get the vaccine". Even the earliest trial results said "you will not be hospitalized or die if you get the vaccine", not that you won't get covid.

And at the time, that was true because we were dealing with the original strain.

Nothing else you said is untrue either. The vaccine drastically reduced the spread of the virus. I'm not sure what you're getting at besides spreading more disinformation.

edit: i've replied several times below but everyone needs to keep in mind WHEN things were said. When the CDC said you wouldn't catch the virus in early 2021 - they were basically fully accurate because we were dealing with the original strain. Delta did not exist yet. The original vaccines were INCREDIBLY effective against the original strain - beyond anyone's wildest expectations. 100% effectiveness against death and severe hospitalization. 95% effectiveness against symptoms entirely. These levels of protection were amazing. Yes, things changed when Delta arrived, and even moreso with omicron and future subvariants, but you can't go back with hindsight and discredit what was said _at the time_.

If someone has lost their motivation to live, then there could be many reasons for that. Society failure? Maybe. Could also be terminal illness, chemical imbalances, PTSD, or other things that are untreatable or uncurable.

and on top of that, it looks like there's other factors of diet than just choosing what to eat - it sounds like some people are just less hungry for indefinite reasons. genetics, gut biome, etc all probably play a part.

Don't forget the other part - being non-anonymous online makes it easy for stalkers and other bad actors to take it to the extreme. We need anonymity for lots of reasons.

It's not quite that simple though. "autopilot" is a blah term, but it's also not possible to say whether or not it has saved lives with auto-avoidance and braking. The hard truth is that for things to get better, they need billions of miles of testing, and you can't do that in a lab.

Yeah this is bad for everyone overall. Disney is an even worse offender if you're looking at synergistic monopolies.

Back in the day sure, but the blizzard of 20 years ago is long gone. Diablo 3 is an abysmal followup to D2, every CoD is just an annual rehash, hearthstone is an absolute moneygrab, and HotS is the most watered down moba I've ever played.

Overwatch is cool though.

edit: and oh my god, let's not forget the absolute dumpster fire of warcraft 3 reforged.

There's not likely to be any more mac x86 development from anyone going forward, and I think M1 is enough of a branch that it makes it difficult to justify it.

Could you install a different browser on the ipad, like firefox? Is there anything preventing the latest version of firefox from installing on an old ipad?

Except you lose a lot of that power through attenuation. You can't really send electricity from the sahara to europe efficiently. Even over relatively short distances (a few dozen miles), you're losing up to 10-15% of your overall energy. A thousand miles or more...and I can't even find numbers on that because nobody does it.

And we're putting in wind and solar at record rates, but that still doesn't cover us at night or when there's no wind. Batteries or other energy storage cannot meet the demand yet. Nuclear is still the best option for continuous weather-independent power among all the low-polluting options.

This one seems to be mostly performance related with no/few functional changes.

I use it on ios, macos, and windows with zero issues. I can't remember the last time it crashed on me.

It depends if we're judging the overall predictions of everyone, or this specific author's predictions. I always tend to look at it at the author-level, because otherwise the infinite monkeys theorem applies anyway.

I think this author should be given credit for the accuracy. He can't control what everyone else is writing and how accurate or inaccurate they were. He can only control his own predictions, and they were very good.

That only seems relevant if the author of this had a vast number of predictions.

Overall, yeah, there were tons. That doesn't detract from how accurate this particular piece was.

They're also covered if you don't have insurance, but yeah that could be completely correct if you're not a citizen/resident of the US. Bummer.

Yeah...facebook isn't dominant because it's the best platform, it's because moving away from it requires your entire circle to move away from it as well, otherwise you're just running two platforms side by side.

Google Plus was superior to facebook but never stood a chance.