You need to learn about mass balances.

The article recommends gaslighting the public to sidestep opposition to the AI rollout, while embedding AI into education, healthcare, and routine governance.

Wonderful

He did a good job with the (admittedly small) part of the emperor in Dune.

Your traffic is encrypted, but it is still possible to see what sites you are visiting without a VPN.

With a VPN, all your traffic will just be to the VPN server, and any logs of the sites you visit will sit with the VPN operator.

That would prevent cell signals from inside, making it harder to (e.g.) call the fire department, or an ambulance.

What we know is that general relativity fails to explain gravitational interactions at very large scales for the matter we can see in telescopes.

The simplest answer for this conundrum is that there is extra matter that we can’t see in telescopes - aka it is ‘dark’ matter. This substance doesn’t appear to interact at all outside of gravity - which is a property we haven’t observed anywhere else. Further, in order to explain the motions we see, it would have to outweigh all the visible matter in the universe by a factor of 5, which seems to strain credibility given that - again - we have never seen anything like it.

Another answer for the observations is we are wrong about gravity, that it behaves differently at very large scales. This doesn’t require a massive amount of invisible magic substance conveniently spread throughout the universe, but to date no theory has been able to explain all the strange observations - and Dark Matter remains the moderate consensus view.

This doesn’t mean dark matter absolutely exists, it is just a hole in our current understanding. We’ve been looking for it for nearly a century and have yet to find direct evidence. In fact, there isn’t even one theory of Dark Matter because it also has difficulty explaining every available observation.

In summary: we have mountains and mountains of evidence that our current theory of gravity fail to explain the big stuff, we have exceedingly little evidence as to what the disconnect with reality is.

In fairness, seasons and varied terrain aren’t guaranteed.

Of all the bodies in the solar system, only Earth has such a wide variety of landscape. Mars is rocky desert or rocky desert with canyons. Pluto is ice ball or rocky ice ball. Etc.

Also, if humans were colonizing earth from outside, we would probably just build cities on the river deltas and skip the less habitable spots. Stories set here would then just be cityscape or river delta, even though the ice caps/mountains/jungles/deserts still exist. Colonized worlds will have different population distribution that organically settled ones.

The port is great.

Device manufacturers putting said port deep in the bowels of Erebus where no mortal man could hope to actuate the locking mechanism is less great.

Tests should be written from requirements. Using LLMs to write tests after the code is written (probably also by LLMs) is a huge anti-pattern:

The model looks at what the code is doing and writes tests that pass (or fail because they bungle the setup). What the model does not do, is understand what the code needs to do and write tests that ensure that functionality is present and correct.

Tests are the thing that should get the most human investment because they anchor the project to its real-world requirements. You will have tons more confidence in your vibe coded appslop if you at least thought through the test cases and built those out first. Then, whatever the shortcomings of the AI codebase, if the tests pass you can know it is doing something right.

I have KDE + Wayland on Arch using an Nvidia GPU and I have tons of nagging issues that seemingly cannot be resolved with current drivers.

More power to you if it all just works, but that isn’t universal

The end of your comment was

But the productivity and quality debates are absolutely ridiculous

Which is a general statement and not dealing with your specific circumstance. If a tool works for you, by all means keep using it.

However, broadly across software that is not the case. So the “productivity and quality debates” are not ridiculous … the data supports the sceptics.

Consider: the facts

People are very bad at judging their own productivity, and AI consistently makes devs feel like they are working faster, while in fact slowing them down.

I’ve experienced it myself - it feels fucking great to prompt a skeleton and have something brand new up and running in under an hour. The good chemicals come flooding in because I’m doing something new and interesting.

Then I need to take a scalpel to a hundred scattered lines to get CI to pass. Then I need to write tests that actually test functionality. Then I start extending things and realize the implementation is too rigid and I need to change the architecture.

It is as this point that I admit to myself that going in intentionally with a plan and building it myself the slow way would have saved all that pain and probably got the final product shipped sooner, even if the prototype was shipped later.

Cook bacon once and all that is now covered in grease

I’ve had good luck with their mid-high end kitchen appliances and washer/dryer.

Not impressed with the TV and the AI update made the UI very slow and unresponsive. Next one will not be LG.

Well… Earth’s rotation would mean that the top of the lorry would be moving at 3.3 million light years per second … Or you know, about 100 trillion times the speed of light.

That might break some things.

It is a useful distinction when considering possible rehabilitation. In general conversation it’s just weird.

It’s never been tested, so it is an open question. Not many people would be bold enough to try, and I don’t think Trump actually will either, but eventually this will go to the Supreme court.

The main problem is, at the time the 22nd was written, there were plenty of cases of presidents who weren’t elected to the office, so why would the text specify only the electoral pathway if it were meant to cover all possible pathways? Even in the most broad reading (no elected official can become president after having been elected president twice), there remain appointed positions within the line of succession - namely secretary of state - that would completely avoid the election clause.

I agree with you that the intent of the 22nd was to ensure a 2 term limit. Unfortunately the language is not that definitive and the current administration has little concern for following the unwritten rules.

Not quite… the constitutional requirements to be president are simple: Natural born citizen, 35+ years old, and US residency for at least 14 years.

It is an open legal question whether and how the 12th and 22nd interact to determine eligibility. The intent seems clear, but the language of the 22nd very plainly concerns only election to the office, not assumption of it.

So the constitution doesn’t actually prohibit anyone from serving more than 2 terms as president, it prohibits someone being elected to the office of president more than twice (or once if they assumed office for more than 2 years of someone else’s term.

In 2029 Trump could be elected as speaker of the house and then Vance and Dr. Evil resign as POTUS and VP and bam, Trump round 3.

Trump could also be directly elected to the Vice Presidency, though the legal ground there is shakier given the 12th amendment.

Ultimately, SCOTUS would need to weigh in because there is enough ambiguity in the constitution to allow for just the scenarios above.

Good thing SCOTUS is chock full of no-nonsense nonpartisan jurists of the highest integrity.

Note: N^2 and NlogN scaling refer to runtime when considering values of N approaching infinity.

For finite N, it is entirely possible for algorithms with worse scaling behavior to complete faster.