Base-60 for everyday life would be nuts; you really think it would be more convenient to have 60 independent digit symbols?
There's an argument for 12 for sure, but I still think having a power of 2 would be more beneficial than having the extra factors. 8 would give you the same number of integer factors as 10, plus all the benefits of being a power of 2.
The topic of this thread is why the base 10 number system is less than optimal, and a different base would be better. Obviously having to convert to other bases when we use a base 10 system normally is inconvenient, but that's not the point.
Or forget about the thumbs and just count fingers. 8 would be a better base than 10 for sure, and arguably better than 12. (Easier doubling and halving, easier binary conversions, but fewer integer factors and fewer digits.)
5 and 10 are arbitrary numbers though. Halving and doubling are really the only special operations, and base-8 or base-16 would be superior to 10 or 12 for those.
It's pretty relevant with computers. If we were used to working in base-8 or base-16 in everyday life, numerous aspects of programming would be simplified.
Better would be an even more fundamental change: instead of trying to standardize everything on base 10, recognize that base 8 or 16 is much more convenient in both computing and everyday life, and standardize around that.
Hopefully Signal manages to turn all the recent press into a positive for user acquisition. It's a fantastic app and service. In an ideal world, laws could be updated for the digital age such that automated disappearing messages were not considered equivalent to deleting records, but rather to an in-person conversation or phone call for which records would not be expected to be kept in the first place. I'm not holding my breath on that one though.
Maybe they'd be willing to make an exception for someone doing this, especially if he'd already completed a lot of the journey and so had some credibility built up.
The problem I've always had when forwarding addresses, at least to my Gmail, is that Gmail seems to credit all forwarded spam to the forwarding address, so if your forwarded email gets a lot of spam, it quickly starts sending a large percentage of even the legitimate forwarded email to spam. Is there a solution to that issue?
Instead I've taken to using the pop download option, but that has its own issues (mostly the long delay between downloads).
I think it's pretty well documented that Jobs had direct input into product design. But also, hiring and managing people effectively to produce novel products is part of producing those products.
You also see the opposite bump for most of the negative assessments. My assumption is that they're likely reading the question backwards. ie. "how unlikely" vs "how likely" or similar.
Interesting. Two things that jumped out to me were 1) why do the regions of the standardization line not overlap or at least meet? And 2) What's up with the small but clear minority of people who took all the 'unlikely' phrasings to mean somewhere in the realm of 90 to 100%? My guess would be they're misreading the question and that is their estimate of unlikelihood?
For driving offenses, it's exponentially cheaper and easier to revoke driving privilege than to imprison the offender. Of course if someone ignores the ban and continues driving without a license, consequences would then need to escalate.
Tariffs were done in the past because they were easier, but I think they distort less than an income tax. You're literally favoring domestic producers, right?
The problem is that you massively distort the economy, making it less efficient aka poorer. And that's even before considering the fact that other countries will retaliate.
Probably entirely placebo, but I just spun in my office chair until dizzy then pulled up a 100Hz tone, and as soon as it started playing the dizziness dropped noticeably. Again, I would guess placebo, but hey, if it works. Gotta try it on reading in the car...
In the legal system, formation of a contract requires intent. If it can be demonstrated that there was no intent to form a provision of the contract, no "meeting of the minds", then I don't believe it is enforceable. (Though IANAL.)
No, but at this point there should be mass protests. Deporting innocent people to El Salvadoran prison for life without due process? If people aren't (at least figuratively) up in arms about that, then what?
Best one I've ever heard was from my friend Bill March. (His real last name, not his real first.) He was relatively new to the company, came into the office on April 1, which also happened to be payday, and was handed a check addressed to Bill April.
The funny part is that it wasn't actually an April Fools joke.
This reminds me of the early days of Google, when people who knew how to phrase a query got dramatically better results than those who basically just entered what they were looking for as if asking a human.
And indeed, phrasing your prompts is important here too, but I mean more that by having a bit of an understanding of how it works and how it differs from a human, you can avoid getting sucked in by most of these gaps in its abilities, while benefitting from what it's good at. I would ask it the question about the capital gains rules (and would verify the response probably with a link I'd ask it to provide), but I definitely wouldn't expect it to correctly provide a comparison like that. (I might still ask, but would expect to have to check its work.)