They didn’t. They went to sleep shortly after dark, woke up around midnight to fuck and eat, then went back to sleep until dawn. For hundreds of thousands of years.
That part of the body, like your mouth, has features that greatly reduce the chance of infection because they are the entry and exit points for foreign objects or waste. It is complicated how it all works, but in short your body really needs those parts to bot get infected, so it adapted ways to keep that from happening.
That was the explanation I got from the doc when mine first showed up.
There’s a massive amount of hype right now, much like everything was blockchains for a while.
AI/ML is not able to replace a programmer, especially not a senior engineer. Right now I’d advise you do your job well and hang tight for a couple of years to see how things shake out.
I got reverse onioned a little while ago. There was an article about a kids version of the AR-15 called the JR-15, and it was so ludicrous and I didn’t know that website, I thought it was a satirical article for a while… Weeks later I mentioned it as a joke, but my brother said it was real and I checked and saw he was right.
My favorite childhood toy was a metal-and-plastic, kid-sized Winchester 1873. It came with plastic beads it could shoot - they were all lost within days, but it still made a “pop” when you cocked and shot it. I tried to carry that thing everywhere; I clearly remember the trauma when my parents refused to let me take it to church, or school.
Anyway, I’ve always assumed my experience and desires were pretty standard for kids: they like guns. Is that uniquely American? Do German and Chinese kids not run around with gun-shaped sticks or toys “shooting” at each other?
Sure they do. The difference is they don’t do it with real weapons because people generally don’t own real weapons. When they do own one (for hunting or sport, never for personal protection), it’s locked in a secure safe by law and requires successful completion of a fairly tough training with a proficiency test at the end.
Was the JR15 mentioned above a real gun? I have a hard time imagining a functioning rifle chambered in 5.56 that would be small enough for a child to handle. And AR15s aren’t that big; a young teen can handle them fairly easily.
I guess my point is that the AR frame is about as small as you can make a functioning 5.56 rifle anyway. You could put a shorter barrel on it, maybe lighten the stock, but now you’ve just made a carbine. The upper isn’t getting any smaller… so what’s “JR” about it?
Scaling an AR down so it just looks like one, but is chambered in something shorter like .22 short… I guess you could call it a JR15. Seems like a cheap cop-out, since that upper is the defining feature of the AR15. Although a guess there are derivations chambered in Blackout, Grendel and so on, and they’re all considered based on the AR platform.
There’s conversion kits for regular 5.56 AR to .22lr too. It’s just a bolt and mag change, cmmg sells the “good” ones. Pretty popular choice for plinkers too!
This Jr-15 is injection molded btw, gotta be light af. And it’s made by Schmid of Schmid Tools which is actually pretty cool, they make some good shit. The site for wee1 is down though so while they were at SHOT idk if the product is live or ever will be.
I only occasionally see that here in Asia. It exists, but I feel like it’s much less. I immigrated here maybe 12 years ago from the West. The overall level of violence is much lower than I grew up with (even in Canada).
Most young people I know consider handling guns more of a chore. In Vietnam, learning to disassemble, clean, maintain, and reassemble an AK-47 is a mandatory class. My wife got top score :)
Anyway, we stumbled on a great way to make guns uncool, I think. Personal possession is illegal here except for shotguns, it’s for some very specific scenario that I don’t exactly recall. I knew of some remote workplaces with one, in case of wild animals. We get some, but not many, illegal firearms.
It’s a .22lr though, which is common for teaching kids firearms safety. The only difference between that and the usual .22lr squirrel hunting rifles is it has a few cosmetic features like a pistol grip and a detachable mag rather than an 1880s style mag tube under the barrel. It’s also largely injection molded so it’ll also be lighter than said regular hunting rifle (and of course you could still hunt with this and it takes optics easier thanks to the 1913 rail.)
Works out fine more often than not, just don’t give a 9yo a full auto uzi.
This kid may not be ready for semi, but she will be before she can comfortably hold a heavy aluminum/steel or wood/steel rifle. Gun safety is important for kids to learn if they’re going to be around guns, typically if a kid learns to properly respect the dangers involved it cuts down on the 18 and life type scenarios. Sure, you can keep yours locked and you can vet their friend’s parents before you allow them to stay over at the friend’s house all you want, but you can never truly know if they adhere to safe storage around children or if they keep one out of the safe "where their kid can’t reach (spoiler: he can). If they’re aware of gun safety it increases the likelihood they’ll snitch at the mention of “wanna see my dad’s gun?” (and of course you should instruct them to do so regardless), it decreases the mystique of guns so they’re less curious and more “been there done that let’s watch that awful teen titans reboot abortion instead,” and even if they did find themselves in possession or close to a firearm for some ungodly reason, at least they know how to safely clear the chamber, watch the muzzle, etc, so even if they ignore you telling them to get an adult (grounded for life for sure ofc), if they do handle the gun it decreases the likelihood someone will be injured.
Honestly, it isn’t that bad a move, just be smart, you know, like no full auto uzis until you’re 14. .22lr bolt actions (or air/pellets first then .22lr), then keep moving them up as time goes on (assuming they’re interested and capable, but I mean, don’t force em into ballet either lol).
It is literally the same exact kind of algorithm that predicts the next word you will type on your phone based on what’s already been typed. The differences are that it has a much larger training dataset, which means more accurate predictions, it processes based on the entire body of text that has already been given (including the hidden prompt and previous messages), and that it doesn’t always predict whole words, but instead clusters of characters.
If you want a more general overview of how machine learning works in general, this is a good video series to watch: www.youtube.com/watch?v=aircAruvnKk
If you want to see some evidence that it doesn’t truly understand what it says, try having it generate and explain some jokes or riddles that rely on wordplay. It will completely shatter the illusion.
My major takeaway is that neutral networks, and AI in general, are mostly pattern recognition with a little bias and weighting thrown in to improve accuracy.
And that is why I question all the supposedly amazing things people seem to think it will do and many of the applications of AI.
Weighting and bias are based on the training dataset. And the training dataset of ChatGPT is mostly internet content, literature, social media discussions, articles, etc.
So the inherent biases are going to be limited in the same way. For example, ChatGPT is not good at generating or interpreting code written in Malbolge, despite the fact that this language is meant to be relatively easy to understand for a machine yet difficult for a human to understand. Because it isn’t processing like a machine, it is processing text like a person.
It also is bad at understanding wordplay like puns since wordplay requires a simultaneous understanding of the meaning of a word as well as the linguistics that underly that word. It is decent at generating puns which already exist and are out in the world, but it can’t creatively generate new ones or interpret novel puns or other wordplay, since that would require a deeper understanding of the language.
Looking at the things it is bad at can give a great insight into its limitations, and in turn into how it works.
That’s exactly right. It is a statistical model that is based on some training dataset. The quality of the predictions is only as good as the completeness and bias of the training set.
And it is one of the major issues with giving AI and the corporations who make them free reign to “think” and inform decision making. Feed it a racist dataset, and the AI will be racist. Feed it misinformation, and the AI will only reproduce misinformation.
The proof that AI is just garbage in and garbage out is that AI always does this while some people are able to be anti-racist and anti-misinformation as a response even if most people fall for it.
Feed it a racist dataset, and the AI will be racist. Feed it misinformation, and the AI will only reproduce misinformation.
All of those jokes are plagiarized. It doesn’t actually understand the jokes, it’s just repeating ones that it’s seen before. Ask it to explain why some of these are funny.
Studies in motivational theory have been around for years which generally agree that at a very basic level people need security first, not necessarily to motivate but to be in a position to be motivated. Repeatedly pay has been proven to be a poor motivator over time. By removing the basic insecurity that people face, you give them a chance to focus on actual motivating factors like job satisfaction, self-worth and realisation.
I am on parental leave right now and doing chores around the house never have been more fun and fulfilling.
I don’t have to think about work, we have enough money to not worry about being short at the end of the parental leave. I can concentrate on what is important right now (my family) and not worry about the rest.
If you don’t have to worry about basic things of life, you will find a fullfilling purpose. But the system as set up right now is a scam and people are increasingly squeezed for basic necessities, so they can’t afford to have a purpose.
Absolutely. Security is the enemy of fear and capitalism. Fear as Frank Herbert put it, is the mind killer. If we have security, all of a sudden the horrendous business practices capitalism has been built on and motivated by. Sort of fall apart. Go to work in a soul crushing job, with a toxic environment, for too little pay? Why, when you could stay home and start your own business, maybe even become a better competitor. Or just wait for something better to come along.
Fear is the tool of the powerful. Whether it’s fear of some group they tell you to fear. Or fearing them directly. Without fear, many of the crises we seem to constantly be juggling. Would find themselves solved. Humanity has the ability to feed and house everyone. Right now. The reason we don’t is that the wealthy and powerful would lose wealth and power. And we can’t have that.
People who have their needs met would strive regardless of capitalism. You need to show that they strive because of capitalism. The problem is, capitalism doesn’t meet the needs of a large amount of people. No matter how hard they strive. Nor should it be necessary for them to. Worse capitalism short changes them. And is very inefficient.
Another from chemistry: “small dangers are still dangers, don’t underestimate them”.
This was in my first uni. The person saying that mentioned how he never saw students harming themselves with cyanide, nitration solutions (sulphuric+nitric - highly corrosive and explosive) or the likes. No, it was always with dumb shit like glacial acetic acid skin burns, or a solvent catching fire.
Reminds me that this is the same logic I use on the road.
As a motorcycle rider I’ve become a very cautious car driver.
I’m a paranoid driver and I always assume that people on the road are always going to do something stupid. I’m wrong most of the time and I don’t mind that but whenever I happen to avoid an accident because I was too careful, it reminds me why I’m always paranoid.
Cars. Expensive cars require more frequent and complicated maintenance and repairs than cheaper cars. They over engineer them on purpose in order to make it unreasonable to maintain them in the long run. They don't want their brand sullied by old versions of their cars driven around by poor people.
When I was in college, I admired my boss and his BMW. He then told me that it was a hand-me-down, and he spends a few hours a month maintaining it because there’s always something that breaks and he can’t afford to bring it into the shop every time.
He joked on a few occasions of just giving me the car after a year, and after a while, it felt like a cry for help rather than a joke.
Are you saying that you’ve owned both cheap and expensive cars, and that your favorites have always been the cheap ones? That they’ve been more reliable, more comfortable, better-riding, and better-driving? Or, at least, no worse than the expensive ones?
Yes, more expensive cars are more expensive. They often have a higher cost of ownership. And, sometimes, brands really fuck up and cut corners they shouldn’t, and result an reputational harm that takes years to recover from, long after they’ve fixed the production issues (c.f. Audi in the early 00’s). But, IME, it’s usually worth it, if you can afford it.
Mercedes is an outlier. Try comparing Toyota with Lexus, Nissan with Infiniti, Chevy with Cadillac, or Ford with Lincoln. In all of these instances, the luxury marques have equivalent or better reliability than their economy counterparts.
Of course, whether or not the reliability and features are worth the cost is a different question entirely. (I generally lean towards no.)
Lol I don’t think the reliability difference between Lexus and Toyota is measurable. If anything I see way more old Toyotas on the road than I do old Lexuses. But that may be just because less were produced.
Lexus is made by Toyota, just an fyi. To your point, a lot more vehicles are built with the Toyota badge than the Lexus badge. Options and creature comforts separate the two. Most (maybe all) of them share the same platform with each other.
I’m well aware :) I don’t think that really changes anything of what I said though. Them being owned by the same parent company doesn’t really change anything other than the company culture of reliability, but even so Toyotas are more well known for their reliability. Luxury cars are also inherently less reliable just due to the fact they have more parts and also newer technologies for the luxury aspect that sometimes haven’t had all the kinks engineered out yet.
Cheap cars definitely are more reliable if you pick the right brands. On all the other points it just doesn’t make enough of a difference to me to justify the enormous cost increase.
Our $10k used Camry is still kicking ass over ten years later and hasn’t ever needed work more extensive than replacing leaking struts. The reliability truly is astounding.
EDIT: But, let’s not talk about my camera-buying habits lol
Our 2016 (new) BMW has never had a major issue. Our 2014 (new) Volvo - which cost half what the BMW did, has almost never not had something going wrong with it. We bought a new Altima many years ago that was less expensive than the Volvo; we had it for several years and it was fine, but it was still in the shop more than this BMW (but less than the Volvo).
The issue isn’t so much reliability, but what it costs when there is a problem. Fixing the Altima would certainly be cheaper than the same repair of the BMW. The Volvo TCO is higher than the BMW or the Altima.
I also think you have to be comparing similar years. My sister - who’s 20 years younger than me - is still driving a 1996 Nissan 240SX, and it’s in great chat wasn’t a “cheap” car when it was new, but still. I think cars from last century were more robust.
100% agree here. They all need maintenance, but higher end ones have pricer parts and less common, affordable after market parts. Cars are for the most part a utility and a cost center. You want to minimize your cost and maximize your value gotten out of it.
I despise cars as a status symbol, because again it’s just going to turn into a rust bucket like the rest of them at the same or worse rates, but also it just sets people up for failure in the lives just tens of thousands down the drain, literal years of work, for something’s that’s nearly worthless by the time they pay it off.
Many people have given great suggestions for the most destroying commands, but most result in an immediately borked system. While inconvenient, that doesn’t have a lasting impact on users who have backups.
I propose writing a bash script set up to run daily in cron, which picks a random file in the user’s home directory tree and randomizes just a few bytes of data in the file. The script doesn’t immediately damage the basic OS functionality, and the data degradation is so slow that by the time the user realizes something fishy is going on a lot of their documents, media, and hopefully a few months worth of backups will have been corrupted.
When I had Plex play trailers, it was only ever before movies, with trailers for movies. Seeing it every time you watch an episode of a show is too much.
As far as I'm concerned skippable ads are the same thing as any other ad. I use auto play for a reason and it's because I don't want to fuck with the remote every episode.
If anything they are worse because they make you become aware enough of the ad to make the connection to physically push a button skip it. When HBO Minimum Quality added them I dropped it. When Paramount (We can’t build a functional app) + and Disney Pus (Not a typo) added them I finally built a media server and rejoined the high seas after 20 years. I’ll never go back.
I am down for hyper on-brand, clearly denoted, clever/humorous sponsored segments. StyroPyro was able to advertise a desk this way. So well integrated, honest, and relevant, I didn’t skip even though I don’t need a chemical-resistant adjustable standing desk.
Goddddddddd this and HBO. I’m already on your fuckin platform, show me the show. If you REALLY need to push whatever new BS cash grab you’ve got, put it in a new releases section.
Whether they’re laughing and having fun or screaming and throwing a tantrum. The sound of a child being loud activates an almost primal rage that I can barely contain.
This is actually a neurological thing. It has a name and everything (though I can’t recall what the name is). A lot of people on the spectrum have it. You may want to talk to a therapist about it, if this isn’t merely hyperbole.
I have it. The sounds of people eating, especially slurping or crunching, are literally repulsive. I have to have something else to train my focus on or else I’ll get up and bolt.
Other repetitive sounds trigger it too: people popping gum, chewing ice, clipping fingernails, etc. But not too bad with keyboards and typing.
I’m not sure if I have it or I’m just an irritable asshole, but I certainly gave pause when I first read about it because plenty of sounds people make absolutely do feel like a nail being driven into my brain, inducing a feeling of unrepentant anger that is tough to let go of. Though, they’re usually sounds most people also find irritating. Like lip smacking and nostril wheezing. At what point is it not simply a common irritation and it becomes a disorder? 🤔
When it affects your relationships and your life. My wife has a complex now about crunching in front of me and chooses food accordingly, which makes me feel terrible.
Or when I can’t focus on what my boss is saying because she’s eating almonds while she talks.
I just try to find coping behaviors and sometimes literally bite my lip to get thru some situations.
They bought the game and changed out the graphics API to kill the Linux native builds, then after the community got it working via Wine, they added anticheat. Epic went further than incompetence on that one.
kbin.life
Top