Also, she got second degree burns, and she was not the first person to be injured by the coffee, and McDonald’s was told multiple times that they served their coffee too hot.
During the trial, McDonald’s showed zero care for the the people they injured, to the point that most of the fine that McDonald’s ended up paying was punitive damages
It doesn’t run well on the steam deck, but I generally am able to get 40-50 fps. I capped GPU clock to 1200 MHz, and that seems to help a bit
Sure, but the issue is that employers will try to replace non-replaceable jobs along with the replaceable ones. Eventually employers will figure it out and hire people again for the non-replaceable jobs, but in the meantime, real people with real lives will suffer
Yes, and people do do it. It’s just incredibly difficult to do it even for relatively simple programs, and the more complex the program is, the more exponentially hard the reverse engineering will be.
The problem is not necessarily turning it into code, since many decompilers do it already for you nowadays. The issue is understanding what in the world the code is supposed to do. Normally, open source code would be commented and there would be documentation, so it’s easy to edit or build on the code. Decompiled code comes with no documentation or comments, and all the variable names are virtually illegible.
It’s sometimes easier to build something new than to fix what’s broken, and this would be one of those cases where it’s true
You plan to walk into the counter? Daring strat, but I can see it freaking out the cashier enough to cancel the tip himself if you also maintain eye contact while walking, like an Oblivion NPC
Not necessarily an acronym, but here’s a fun one for Japanese: Laughing in Japanese is warau, which gets shortened when typing to just w. If you want to laugh a lot, you would type wwww. That ends up looking like a field of grass, so that in turn gets shortened into 草 (kusa, or grass). Basically, 草 is the Japanese equivalent of lol
Also, in Chinese, thank you is often abbreviated as 3q, because when you say it out loud, it sounds like “thank you” (san kyu)
Not gaslighting, and from what you seem to describe, doesn’t appear to be manipulative either. She just seems to be angry. Not to say that you can’t be both angry and manipulative, but I don’t see clear intent for her to try to guilt trip or gaslight you.
Gaslighting would be if she lied and said that she sent you a message when in fact she didn’t. i.e., lying with the intent to make you question your judgment and perception
Guilt tripping would be if she pressured you into giving her a gift as compensation for ignoring her message. i.e., taking advantage of someone’s feelings of guilt to get them to do something for you.
I don’t see any lie, and I don’t see hee trying to extract anything out of you. Worst case interpretation, she’s being a bit petty. Best case interpretation, she’s scared of being alone outside.
I noticed your final paragraph, and I would be cautious in general about saying that someone who’s trying to convince you that their anger is justified is automatically manipulative. That’s kind of just how anger works. People think that their anger is justified. Otherwise they wouldn’t be angry. Manipulation occurs when you start to feel like you are being used for their own motives.
Either way, you should probably talk to her about it. It seems like she thinks the issue is more severe than you appear to think, and that is something that should be discussed with her
End of mankind - nothing, really. Even with climate change or nuclear war, the rich will live on. It will be a shitty, greedy, undeserving populace that lives on, but mankind will live on.
End of the world as we know it - climate change. I don’t know of anything else more existential
Not a paleontologist, but I think it’s a mix of both wrong information being spread back then and also new info being discovered.
I’m pretty sure people knew that birds were dinosaurs for a while, but people just liked the idea that dinosaurs were monstrous lizards. Giant monsters just capture the imagination in a way that giant birds can’t.
And then paleontologists started finding fossils that had imprints of feathers still on the body, and it became really hard to ignore that dinosaurs were a lot more bird-like than people would like to believe.
My impression has generally been that once dinosaurs started to be viewed as bird-like, people started to see them as animals rather than as monsters, and that just kinda snowballed into dinosaurs becoming more and more bird-like
Windows comes with a secret option to turn off updates with group policies, so you don’t need to modify anything or use a script. It works just fine for me. No updates (unless I manually click update).
The option for automatic updates is several layers deep in a nested menu tree, and I don’t fully recall what the path to get there is. But you should be able to find it online.
I’m not necessarily sure if that can be correct, depending on the definition. If you are defining a disease or disorder as being abnormal, then perhaps it may have a case there. But many diseases and disorders are defined by whether or not a trait disrupts quality of life. A person may be abnormal, but it doesn’t affect how they live. Therefore, no disease. With this definition, many people can be normal
Looks like a tiger beetle. Cool pictures!
There are certain careers that can’t be replaced by AI - anything that requires working with your hands will not be replaced by AI unless robots suddenly get invented. But if robots exist, then there’s likely bigger things to worry about than your job.
I would look for non-routine jobs that require a lot of handiwork. Non-routine because it will be hard to replace with general, non-AI automation, and handiwork because AI is currently digital only.
Carpentry, plumbing, engineering, laboratory research, teaching all likely fall into the safe category
Sure, I get that, which is why I make the point that the OP may be taking about ritualization. But that isn’t made clear in the original post, and especially with how the post is presented, the OP appears to be actively discouraging that notion. The last sentence is particularly confusing because it’s implying that most if not all company protocols are just as arbitrary and supernatural as attempting to summon a demon.
Nowhere have I said that programs are perfectly fine. In that exact quote that you have quoted me on, I even said that unintuitive features may be bugs passing off as features.
I am making the claim that no matter how much technical debt there is in a code, it is not remotely comparable to occultism and demons. If you read and understand what I have said, I make clear that it is not even that programming and occultism are dissimilar, but more accurately that the two cannot even be categorically compared because there is nothing to compare. You are not comparing apples to oranges, you are comparing apples to chairs.
I’m not sure I understand the analogy. A lot of annoyances that people regularly deal with on computers are either intended mechanisms to stop human bad actors or unintentional bugs passing off as features. You can’t really say the same about demons.
I suppose you might be talking about ritualization, or the idea that the people who build protocols are so removed from the people who follow them, that the people who follow the protocols don’t know why they do the things they do, but only know that bad things happen if they don’t follow the protocols.
But even then, the analogy seems somewhat strenuous, since the point of occultism is exactly to try to study demonology and understand how to work with demons - ie, to try to understand why the protocols are the way they are.
If you wanted to talk about ritualization, there are significantly more apt comparisons. Most examples of culture or religions could be argued to be practical protocols that ended up gaining momentum and becoming more spiritual than they initially were.
Wow, that’s… really sexist against both men and women. I hope you don’t really think that any man can suddenly have a mood change and then overpower any woman.
That’s disrespectful both to the man’s humanity and the woman’s strength
Duolingo is just a tool, I think. You can’t rely on it entirely to learn a language. And especially you have to take an active role in learning when using duolingo. I’m using it to learn Japanese, and I think I’m picking it up somewhat decently.
But what I do is that I don’t look at the word banks when translating, and when there’s a listening activity, I don’t look at the text on the screen. I just try to follow entirely based on what I hear. I always say the Japanese out loud, and I try to form sentences in Japanese by forcing myself to think in Japanese (as opposed to thinking in English and then translating the words into Japanese). And, of course, use other resources to figure out the nuances of the grammar and the vocabulary!
I think if you view duolingo as a way to get more practice with the language, it’s actually a fantastic resource. You just can’t rely on it as an exclusive learning tool
Also, the Japanese that’s spoken in anime isn’t really colloquial Japanese or really even the same Japanese that duolingo covers. Heavily exaggerated example, but it’s a bit like asking someone to translate Shakespeare when someone is learning English. There will be some words that they can pick up, so your children might be able to get the gist of what’s being said, but the tone and wording isn’t really the same.
Not to mention, Japanese is spoken really quickly. Iirc, it’s one of, if not the, fastest languages spoken, when measured in syllables over time. You would find better success with asking your children to translate if you find a Japanese speaking online personality who is known to speak slowly and clearly. Hololive is actually pretty good on this front
Isn’t that just a government job with extra steps? I thought the point of UBI is that it’s meant to be, you know, universal.
As a side note, people have this tendency to think that government programs must be means-tested. That is, there must be a criteria that is met before someone is eligible for the program. Same with your assumption in the post - you assume that it must be better to add a stipulation. There seems to be this natural skepticism that if there is no criteria, people will take advantage of the program. I want to challenge that skepticism.
Adding criteria for eligibility inherently means the government must establish a bureaucracy for checking that the criteria is met. This has two notable downsides that people tend to not consider. First, it causes an applicant to wait longer before they can hear back from the program. With existing programs, it sometimes takes months before someone hears back. This ends up discouraging anyone from applying, even if they meet all the criteria. After all, what’s the point of receiving aid in 3 months if you need the aid now?
Second, it causes the cost of the program to increase. A bureaucracy is difficult to maintain. The more money that is spent on checking for eligibility, the less money that people in need will get. And what is the work that such a bureaucracy will do anyways? How does it benefit society to hire someone to say that people’s needs aren’t “real enough” to get government aid?
Which leads me to a third, additional point - it’s morally questionable to require people to meet a certain criteria before they can receive aid. To put it in another way, why do you feel like you need to gatekeep other people’s needs? If a person says they’re struggling, why should anyone say that they’re not struggling enough?
I think having higher frame rates isn’t necessarily about whether our eyes can perceive the frame or not. As another commenter pointed out there’s latency benefits, but also, the frame rate affects how things smear and ghost as you move them around quickly. I don’t just mean in gaming. Actually, it’s more obvious when you’re just reading an article or writing something in Word. If you scroll quickly, the words blur and jitter more at low frame rates, and this is absolutely something you can notice. You might not be able to tell the frametime, but you can notice that a word is here one moment and next thing you know, it teleported 1 cm off