Not that I spend a lot of time shopping the black market for human body parts, but if this price list was true a LOT more people would be selling their blood on the black market if it was $297/pint. US Red Cross says you can donate whole blood (which is one pint) 6 times a year. That would be a nice $1782 cash infusion (pun intended) for most folk’s bank account.

I am, but so is the OP in the image so my statement still stands.

As I said “if”, and I too think its unlikely, but it is possible. They may have a data agregator where the customer inputs their assets and liabilities, or it may be able to compare against only the bank’s products. So if you have a single bank that you use for your credit cards, car loan, and personal checking account, it would have all of those exposed for calculations.

If its an actual calculation considering all her assets and debts being $1.76 positive is a really good achievement especially for a younger person.

This means zero credit card debt, no car note, no mortgage payment, no student loans, or if there are any she has enough cash that she could pay them off and still have $1.76 left over.

And it reminds me of his fling with the “Metaverse” of previous years — another tech buzzword buried in the graveyard of overhype alongside things like NFTs and LaserDisc.

I was with you until you hated on LaserDisc. In the years before DVD existed it was the best quality home video available. Yes, it was expensive, but it did something people wanted with no other substitute apart from having your own cinema grade 35mm projector, sound system, and access to 35mm (or 70mm for that matter) print of a movie.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. I appreciate it.

Have a happy new year!

You too!

If you want to vote by mail please do so as soon as you can and consider dropping it off at the counter where they will postmark it right away.

Even then you have to request it. The term you need to ask for is “hand canceling”. The USPS worker will take a handheld ink stamp and mark over the postage stamp with the received date. That letter is now “processed” as received by the post office.

I think we’ll have to agree to disagree. Often times if I see an interesting question in the comments, I am glad for it, because that was the insight I needed to want to read the article and answer it.

Just reading comments without the article? I have no issue with that at all, and do that myself.

For me that isn’t annoying unless the commenter is getting something wrong that is talked about in the article, and doubles down on it.

How do you, as the commenter yourself, know you aren’t getting something wrong without reading the article?

I feel like each post is an invitation to discuss the general topic

How do you know what the general topic is without reading the article?

If you feel like that is disrespectful, I get where you’re coming from, but I don’t think it is that disrespectful.

Maybe disrespectful is too strong a term. Let me amend that; I lose respect for the poster when they’re asking a question that is answered in the article. I sometimes write off engaging with them further in that thread because they’re clearly not even doing the most basic of tasks to be a part of the conversation.

But plenty of interesting conversations can happen in the comments (like this one) that have almost nothing whatever to do with the article!

I’ll do this too on occasionally, if I can clearly tell we’re not discussion the article topic, but its a gamble on my part and if someone smacks me down because it is article topical, I fully own that and apologize knowing its my fault.

I get where you’re going here and I do the same as far as reading, but before I post I make it a point to actually read the article. Otherwise I may be forming and asking questions clearly already addressed or are completely divorced from the actual topic because I lack the articles context.

I feel it is part of the mutual respect with other posters to not waste their time asking questions already answered (in the article) or derailing the conversation because I don’t know what conversation I’m in.

Nowadays, iOS sees just as many vulnerabilities as every other popular OS.

I’m no Apple fanboy but Apple security is more than the OS. Since they also produce all of the hardware, it means they can do things at the hardware level and either make available or restrict things to the OS that Windows cannot do because Microsoft doesn’t control all the hardware makers.

I’m posting this in Asahi Linux on an M2 powered Macbook. Its been an interesting experience learning not only the benefits of this as a hardware platform, but also its limitations from the FOSS point of view.

I’ll go one further:

• Assumes the bulb is in reach. When I read the problem I assumed the bulb was in a ceiling fixture out of reach. Nowhere in the text description did it specify the physical location, except “in the other room”.

On the downside, Energy Dome’s facility takes up about twice as much land as a comparable capacity lithium-ion battery would. And the domes themselves, which are about the height of a sports stadium at their apex, and longer, might stand out on a landscape and draw some NIMBY pushback.

This is surprisingly good! I would have figured it would have taken far more than twice the land than a Lithium battery solution.

yeah, sure thing buddy. the CO2 will be in a closed loop until it won’t. just like Fukushima and Chernobyl were supposed to be closed loop systems, until they weren’t. disasters happen, no matter how much the techbro mindset insists that they’re impossible.

So you concern is the ecological impact should this bubble fail and the entirety of the CO2 is released to the atmosphere as pollution? Did you even read the article? They discuss that.

First, a full on failure would be rare. Then, a full on failure of 100% loss of the closed loop CO2 is equivalent to 15 round trip flights of a jet flying from New York to London. To put it in perspective there about 250+ flights of this length per day from London, with many being much much farther.

So you’re comparing the impacts of a once in a lifetime nuclear power plant failure to the impacts of another source 1/16th of something that already happens every in one airport. Your logic is why out of whack on this if this is your concern with the bubble.

I was thinking about much larger scale bubbles in “unwanted” geological depressions such as old open pit mines or rock quarries. The depression in the ground might offer more protection allowing it to scale up higher in volume.

Your internet traffic is already encrypted in transit, that what the “s” in https means.

You don’t get the “s” until you have the “https”. Your DNS request which turns www.TheWebsiteYouDoNotWantKnown.com into its IP address happens before you have the “s” in “https”. By default, that request is sent in plaintext, and frequently by default, to your internet service provider. So an outside monitor may not be able to see the contents of the website once you establish your https connection, they likely know that you went there and have a good idea how long you stayed on it.

While its also possible to encrypt the DNS request with DoH or DoT, its not on by default and requires the user to take configuration actions in their browser. If they’re looking at VPNs for the first time, they likely don’t know this and are sending their DNS requests in the clear.

Maybe MS couldn’t stuff enough ads into the old Start Menu requiring a re-write to allow for more ad space. /s

In every version of Windows up until now which has contained a taskbar and start menu, as far back as Windows 95. Not just Windows 10.

Sadly not true. Microsoft removed the Start button in a version of Windows before. It was in Windows 8 (and Windows Server 2012 for some godforsaken reason) with the cursed “metro” interface. MS did it for the same stupid reason they’re citing here “tablet and touchscreen users”. The uproar caused MS to release Windows 8.1 a year later where they returned the Start button.

That will backfire on employers. With the shortage of seniors with good skills, the demand will rise for them. An employer that squeezes his seniors will find them quitting because there will be another desperate employer that will treat them better.

But inexperienced coders will start to use LLMs a lot earlier than the experienced ones do now.

And unlike you that can pick out a bad method or approach just by looking at the LLM output where you correct it, the inexperienced coder will send the bad code right into git if they can get it to pass a unit test.

I get your point, but I guess the learning patterns for junior devs will just be totally different while the industry stays open for talent.

I have no idea what the learning path is going to look like for them. Besides personal hobby projects to get experience, I don’t know who will give them a job when what they produce from their first efforts will be the “bad coder” output that gets replaced by an LLM and a senior dev.

At least I hope it will and it will not only downsize to 50% of the human workforce.

I’ve thought about this many times, and I’m just not seeing a path for juniors. Given this new perspective, I’m interested to hear if you can envision something different than I can. I’m honestly looking for alternate views here, I’ve got nothing.

It won’t replace good coders but it will replace bad ones because the good ones will be more efficient

Here’s where we just start touching on the second order problem. Nobody starts as a good coder. We start making horrible code because we don’t know very much, and though years of making mistakes we (hopefully) improve, and become good coders.

So if AI “replaces bad ones” we’ve effectively ended the pipeline for new coders to enter the workforce. This will be fine for awhile as we have two to three generations of coders that grew up (and became good coders) prior to AI. However, that most recent generation that was pre-AI is that last one. The gate is closed. The ladder pulled up. There won’t be any more young “bad ones” that grow up into good ones. Then the “good ones” will start to die off or retire.

Carried to its logical conclusion, assuming nothing else changes, then there aren’t any good ones, nor will there every be again.