> It's a useless technology anyway
I hope this quote someday goes on to be as infamous as "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame." but Slashdot probably isn't relevant enough for that any longer.
Yeah, because the customers don't want anything else. Itch.io is great
Didn't deepseek prove that we can have AI at a fraction of the energy cost?
It dit, right before it discovered the Jevons paradox.
If they ever want to do that, they should hire Kitboga. He made a digital maze where a bunch of scammers are still looking for some bitcoin that doesn't exist by solving captchas, waiting on hold in ridiculous phone trees, etc.
Here's the thing though. I don't think nut milk producers are trying to fake people out. A huge part of their value proposition is that their milk doesn't come from animals, just like goat milk suppliers aren't going to want you to miss that the milk comes from goats, not cows. Same for veggie meats and sausages.
Cow tittie milk should be labeled "cow tittie milk" to remind people where the product comes from. It's natural for mammals to drink the tittie milk of their own species when they're young, but drinking tittie milk (a) when you're grown up and (b) from another species seems downright perverse. Likewise, people could use a good reminder how the meat they eat is produced.
of course the helicopter parents screaming because they aren't tethered 24x7 to their child.
In Finland we've just started the first phone-free school year. Apparently, some parents are getting doctor's orders to allow their child to keep their phone, for situations such as anxiety attacks (article in Finnish). It's a miracle how such kids would have survived before mobile phones.
34 was my age when I quit my day job, thanks to Linux and the floodgates of open source software it opened for me.
Force them to call it rent if they reserve the right to yank it back
I think a long-term rental is called "leash" for this reason.
I have a hard time believing that a particular encryption will remain unbreakable, quantum computers or not. At the moment, we have Shor's algorithm for factoring numbers on QCs, so we should avoid relying on the hardness of factorization. How can we be sure that there won't be new algorithms in the future that break the current "post-quantum" encryption?
During my advanced math studies, I only took a rather introductory course on encryption, including stuff like Galois fields and elliptic curves. I recall my professor saying that none of the current encryption methods (besides something like the one-time pad) are proven to be safe; we just don't know any efficient methods of breaking them at the moment.
Indeed and I just found one: IQ is not measured in percent and cannot be measured in percent. It makes no sense to do so.
Why not? It's originally a quotient of two numbers multiplied by 100, just like any other percentage.
"Originally, IQ was a score obtained by dividing a person's mental age score, obtained by administering an intelligence test, by the person's chronological age, both expressed in terms of years and months. The resulting fraction (quotient) was multiplied by 100 to obtain the IQ score." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It is surely a great calamity for a human being to have no obsessions. - Robert Bly
