i bet you i could predict it with 100% accuracy if you give me another 4 months

same tbh

poor guy spent so much time on reddit that he forgot women exist

i’m sure the free market will solve this. we just need to wait for a new company to pop up, make a new operating system, ensure windows programs are properly emulated, convince the majority of people and businesses to use it, and then use its new monopoly for good.

what if we made a new type of blockchain? one that was powered by generative AI and the metaverse? oh! and could we make it so that it Empowers Business Solutions?

yeah that's a pretty big oversight tbh. they should make the website play "hold" music and add some "timeout" popups you have to keep clicking

back in my day we only had one language. it was called ASSEMBLY. wanted to make the computer do something? you had to ask it yourself. and that worked JUST FINE

In a report from The Heritage Foundation back in 2020, the group estimated billions would be saved …

in a better world, it wouldn’t matter what the heritage foundation thinks. they’re a conservative propaganda machine that pushes climate change denial, transphobia, and voter fraud claims. it’s dishonest reporting to cite them without mentioning their track record and credibility.

i thought it would be helpful to make a comment on why the probability after switching is 66%, since it's very counterintuitive. the main reason has to do with why a certain door was chosen to be opened.

in more detail: it helps to instead think about a situation where there are 100 doors, 99 of which have a goat behind them. (original problem was about goats and a car). you choose one of 100 doors. there's a 1% chance you picked the door with the car. in other words, there is a 99% chance the car is behind a door you did not pick. put differently, 99 times out of 100, you are in a situation where the car is behind a door you did not choose.

afterward you pick your door, the host picks 98 doors with goats behind them and opens them. (this is another crucial detail, the host can only open doors that don't have a car behind them.) it is still true that 99% of the time, the car is behind a door you did not choose. this is because the doors were opened after you made your choice. but now, there is only one door you did not choose, so that door has a 99% chance of having a car behind it.

it’s worth mentioning that very rarely is baby formula better than breast milk. the contents of breast milk change depending on the what the child needs at the moment. it’s really sick that some companies market it as a better option than breast milk

source

Many users called lawmakers' offices to complain, congressional staffers told Politico. "It's so so bad. Our phones have not stopped ringing. They're teenagers and old people saying they spend their whole day on the app and we can't take it away," one House GOP staffer was quoted as saying.

and they still voted 50-0. really tells you something about how much these politicians are willing to listen to their constituents.

good for this guy for trying to learn more about the stuff he’s regulating. although i can’t help but feel concerned that “congressman wants to understand the things he’s regulating” is a headline news story. shouldn’t this be the bare minimum?

Anyone can pay $150 to become a dues-paying member and rub elbows with the court’s nine justices at events like the dinner where Windsor spoke with Alito. (Tickets for the dinner were an extra $500.)

this is all it took for him to admit this stuff? anybody with 650$ could have walked in and asked him a couple prodding questions? these guys really arent even trying to hide it anymore

Legal experts say it’s an uphill battle to argue in court, since the amendment has hardly been exercised in modern history.

i find this very strange. it’s like they’re saying no one really knows what the amendment means because it hasn’t been used in a while. i’m not a lawyer, so my opinion doesn’t really mean much on this. i but i don’t see how it’s that vague (although it is a little vague). i also don’t see why the legal strength of an amendment should depend so much on how often it’s been used.

i’m not saying they’re wrong, i just don’t understand why it’s like that.

although sometimes they beat you up for no good reason, which isn’t very convenient

as president i promise to dismantle the whole government

Board chair Robyn Denholm wrote in a letter included in the regulatory filing: "Elon has not been paid for any of his work for Tesla for the past six years... That strikes us, and the many stockholders from whom we already have heard, as fundamentally unfair."

Musk's compensation for 2023 was $0, the filing showed, as the billionaire does not take a salary from the company and is compensated through stock options.

it's so unfair that elon hasnt gotten a single pay check and has instead had to settle for making billions off of his stock options. think of all the mega yachts and social media companies he could've bought if only he had been paid a salary.

he made the shark to witness it all

McCarthy […] said he is leaving “to serve America in new ways.”

this is very ominous sounding

this may be the thing that topples the gop

if only they still controlled texas

yeah i mean how do we really know the kids were working there. maybe all 25 kids just happened to stumble into the factory and started playing with equipment right before the federal agents got there

i think you’re responding to a normative statement by making a descriptive statement.

for those unaware, here’s a quick explanation from wikipedia: a normative statement is “meant to talk about the world as it should be”, while a descriptive statement is “meant to describe the world as it is”.

amateurs

def is_even(n: int):
    if n ==0：
        return True
    elif n < 0:
        return is_even(-n)
    else:
        return not is_even(n-1)

i am not an expert on the subject but i would imagine it’s because it has implications for the safety and legal rights of trans people. if they’re able to pass laws banning drag queens, they might then start (incorrectly) claiming that trans people are drag queens and thus those laws apply to them.

who could have seen this coming

whenever someone says “it’s that simple”, it’s not.

then you wouldn't be able to do anything (or at the very max, just hide the ad and wait 30s on a blank screen

i would choose the blank screen over watching an ad, every single time

i’m often amazed at microsoft’s ability to take a useful product and make it agonizing to use

how do you know it’s not from the secret second mod team?

Microsoft is seeking feedback on the changes, so it’s possible the company could decide to ditch these ads […]

are they really looking to see if people want to see more ads? i can’t imagine this is anything more than a meaningless corporate “we value your feedback” message. they already know what people think about ads in their operating system, they’ve tried it many times

unfortunately the local storage technology just isn’t there yet. we have to rely on the magic of the cloud to handle complex things like auto saving files and running python interpreters

Outside the pub, tenant advocates were having conversations with passerby who disagreed with the protest. “Wouldn’t it be bad if we were celebrating landlords losing their homes?” one protester (left) said.

what a strange thing to say outside an event where landlords are celebrating being able to evict people again.

edit: i misread the article when i made this comment

i wonder how 5% of employees getting laid off will translate into executive bonuses. last year the top 2 guys made $72 million after laying off a bunch of people.

“over the top” is a bit tame in my opinion. i would frankly go as far as to say what they’re doing is “not cool”, maybe even “uncalled for”

it’s for cooking turd brownies

what i’m gathering from this thread is that i should learn cobol

they could get an extra 50 billion if they say “security for children, against terrorists”

its really absurd. it becomes even stupider when considering that many of these assumptions allow mathematical models to be built on top of them, and then those models are treated with such importance and authority. but then they sometimes also get the math wrong. i remember learning a while back that part of the 2009 housing crash was caused by faulty mathematics laid ontop of these weird economic assumptions. the part im talking about is:

The paper, generally referred to as the Dahlem report, condemns a growing reliance over the past three decades on mathematical models that improperly assume markets and economies are inherently stable, and which disregard influences like differences in the way various economic players make decisions, revise their forecasting methods and are influenced by social factors.

the first part refers to a kind of "smoothness assumption", where they approximate the bumpy, jagged graph with a "smooth" curve that is easier to analyze. but it turned out the bumps were there for a reason. oops! the second part of the quote then says that in addition to the faulty smoothness assumption, there were quite a few important things the model flat out ignored

kids just don’t want to work anymore these days. they’re too busy with their avocados and ipad games. meanwhile the child unemployment rates are at historical highs. won’t someone think of the economy?