So the guys who have been burning almost as much VC money as they have water and electricity in the name of building AGI have announced that they’re totally gonna do it this time? Just a few more training runs man I swear this time we’re totally gonna turn everyone into paperclips just let me have a few more runs.

Not gonna lie, “enforcing the line between ketchup and tomato sauce” isn’t the sort of thing I’d expect the government to be into, but I guess I’m not mad about it?

Gotta be cheaper than buying new planes which would also have new engines. Generally there needs to be a pretty substantial increase in capability before it’s worth retiring an existing platform, especially in a logistics role where you don’t get as much benefit from the bleeding edge because nobody’s supposed to be shooting at you in the first place.

I think the missing piece here is that B-52 isn’t just a pretty good cargo hauler, it’s a pretty good cargo hauler that we don’t need to buy a whole new airframe to get. Think of it less as “we’re commissioning these B-52s” and more as “hey look we found a way to use all these B-52s we already had” only this just keeps working forever.

I mean a lot of the services that companies are using are cloud-hosted, meaning that especially if you have branch offices or a lot of remote workers a normal firewall in the datacenter introduces an unnecessary bottleneck. Putting the logical edge of your organization’s network in the cloud too makes sense from a performance perspective in that case, and then turning the actual firewalls into SaaS seems much less absurd.

Isn’t this the women that conservatives tried to say was so attractive that her success was somehow anti-woke?

I’m pretty sure based on the structure of the deal between the Onion and the Connecticut families this basically guarantees that the families (and any other creditors I guess) take home less money. Given the amount of money that they’re owed from the Connecticut judgement those families are basically 95% of the beneficiaries of this sale, and the original deal with the Onion had them giving up a huge chunk of what they could be entitled to in order to make sure that the Texas families (who were victimized in the same way but weren’t part of the same suit and got a much lower reward from a Texas court) got $100,000 more than they would have under the next-best offer. So in order for this to end up being a gain the next-best bid would need to either be so high that giving up $1.5 billion wouldn’t be enough to exceed what the Texas families would get, or else it gives the other bidder the ability to cut their bid to basically nothing and in turn reduce the amount that the Connecticut families forgo and the amount the Texas families take home by however much they want.

This is all amateur analysis, but short of rejecting the Connecticut/Onion bid outright for some reason I don’t think there’s any way that this doesn’t put the families in a worse spot. Instead whoever is behind the FUAS bid (widely believed to be Jones’s allies) may get to decide how much to screw the families over.

Edit to fix some numbers. What’s $1,498.5 billion between friends?

“In what other profession do you need panic buttons?”

I’m just gonna look awkwardly at bank tellers, convenience store clerks, and so many other front-line customer service jobs that either have or would greatly benefit from a panic button to deal with dangerous customer interactions or outright robbery.

Poland is a legal fiction invented by Russians, Germans, Poles and Lithuanians to disguise the true and righteous destiny of East Dakota.

These are actually two slightly different options. Mouse sensitivity is how far the cursor or camera moves based on how far the mouse moves. More sensitivity means that the camera moves more if you move the mouse the same distance.

Mouse acceleration tracks how fast the mouse moves over that distance and extends the amount the camera or cursor moves if it moves faster or decreases it if it moves slower. In some cases this can feel more natural, but in others it can make it harder to be both fast and precise in your movements, since moving faster can make you overshoot compared to making the same movement more slowly.

I didn’t say anything about voting, I’m just trying to be realistic about who else is looking forward to the collapse of the current system. If you want to roll the dice on that then you should at least be honest about who else is sitting at the table.

So the neocons of the 2000s are the C’tan, providing neoliberals with unending life by running against fascists and also necrosteel bodies but at the cost of their souls. One day we will overthrow the gods and place their shards into our doomsday weapons.

Hey now, let’s be fair. It’s not just ashes, it’s also going to be blood. And between 2 and 3 of the 4 cats are literal Nazis.

Right, because the alternative somehow isn’t “genocide, but also you lose even more of what little power you still have over this supposed democracy.”

Even if this election doesn’t let us end the genocide, one option is actively threatening to use military force against political dissidents, which tends to make it even harder to push for a change in foreign policy.

Damn, I can’t wait to hear about all the things you’re doing to try and actually end the abominable genocide against the people of Palestine. Meanwhile the rest of us are looking for ways to do that and also voting against the guy who promised to double-down and bring the violence home against immigrants.

Pretending Trump’s presidency wouldn’t be objectively worse for all the causes leftists care about, even the ones (like Palestine) Harris isn’t going to do shit about isn’t taking a principled stand. It’s hiding from what little power you have in the electoral system in order to keep whatever happens next off your conscience. And frankly, the Palestinians don’t care about your conscience any more than the Hispanic Americans or trans kids.

I think the other important point to add is that evo psych in popular discourse is rarely used to explain alone. Instead it seems to always lead into the naturalistic fallacy as an explanation for why the world can’t or shouldn’t be kinder, more humane, or less authoritarian. Add on to this that the people making these arguments are usually pretty out of touch with the actual archaeological record about their supposed environment of evolutionary adaptiveness and it’s not at all surprising that whatever legitimate insights it may offer are buried under a mountain of bullshit.

Honestly I think a lot of the worst evo psych takes don’t even get as far as hypothesizing or evidence. They fail at the first hurdle of “identify something about the world”. It’s the classic Freudian error of never once asking “hey wait is everyone like this or is it just me?”

Horses were at least marginally less ridiculous before people got involved. Not quite to the same extent as dogs, but compare a steppe horse with a thoroughbred and you’ll see that they’re smaller and hardier. Much better equipped to live, slightly less able to carry fully armored people on their back.

Actually it’s vitally important if you’re going to have an outdoor catgirl. Otherwise they’ll decimate the local birdgirl population.

I mean, does she actually write books anymore? Or is she a full time TERF now? Because that’s a direct conflict between what’s in her legal best interest and in her professional best interest.