Comment Re: Human validation with history? (Score 1) 174
"Risk, is not the topic that will earn you a smile from a grieving mother of a perfectly healthy child who's now dead."
Coddling idiots only drags the rest of us down to their level.
"Risk, is not the topic that will earn you a smile from a grieving mother of a perfectly healthy child who's now dead."
Coddling idiots only drags the rest of us down to their level.
You say "China" but this is a private Chinese company. "China", as in the Chinese government, does have its own space programme that, like NASA, works with commercial partners. They are looking to put people on the moon around 2030, and on track to do it, but this company is working on low cost to Earth orbit payloads.
It's not that Windows 11 doesn't have and "must have" features
Name one.
I really don't want this "feature". What I want is for existing features to work correctly.
For example, automated subtitling. For some reason the subtitles sometimes just stop coming for a while, then you get half a minute's subtitles all at once so you have to pause to read them. I've been watching foreign content lately and I depend on this functionality to understand what's happening, and it often just doesn't work right.
If Google could just pull their head out of their ass long enough to make their service work correctly and wouldn't bundle shit I don't want with it and overcharge, I would pay for a subscription to Youtube. But I absolutely will not give them money while they are proving that they don't give a single solitary fuck about their software actually working.
Companies with smart leadership will put just enough effort into AI bullshit to have something to sell to idiots, but won't bet the farm on it.
He is grounded in faith in white supremacy, which does indeed go back centuries, but no one should be defending it.
"What if you got professional help and got over your paranoid delusions that Trump is going to do anything besides enforce existing laws"
What if you shut your fucking traitor face? Trump is ignoring multiple court decisions right now, the idea that he is enforcing laws is probably the dumbest bullshit you've ever spread, and you're a spectacular idiot all day.
Codeberg is very nice, all the more so because it's a non-profit that's made efforts to protect itself from risks of enshitiffication. You can self host its entire system, Forgejo, which, while not at the same level as Gitlab, also requires exponentially less resources for something that implements everything most people want or need, and only misses a small number of things the power users want. You can easily self host on a Pi, if you don't have a server set up for that kind of thing.
Codeberg largely exists because of issues with Gitea's management and signs it was about to follow Gitlab in the enshittification path. While those fears haven't been realized, Codeberg forked Gitea into Forgejo, and that seems, now, to be where the mindshare is.
(I honestly think we're not going to see any progress in computing back to positive things if those with the skills to self host stuff don't start doing so and don't start working on making it easier for everyone to self host everything. But that's a different rant. Point is, Codeberg is great if you're not ready to do that yet, and Forgejo is even better if you are.)
Microsoft's popular Arial font was created to have the exact same dimensions and spacing as Helvetica. Font designs and things like spacing aren't protected by copyright law, only the actual code that defines the fonts, the font file, is.
The Microsoft version renders nicely on screen, and be substituted for Helvetica in print, and was much cheaper than licencing Helvetica itself. Apple did later licence Helvetica, but it looks crap on screen when rendered using their mediocre font rendering code.
Anyway, there is an opportunity here for someone to make a very similar, metric compatible font, and sell it for $350/year.
They could send Dragon to the moon, but it would need a fair bit of development work. More fuel, longer term habitation. It will also need to transport the lander there, so will need some kind of adapter and some way to either launch with it attached, or to collect it in Earth orbit.
It's not impossible, but I wouldn't place any bets on who gets there first.
Sometimes they aren't even mistakes. A classic one is "Diet Water". In Japanese, the word "water", as in the English loan word that they have adopted, refers to flavoured health/energy drinks. They have a word for actual water, "mizu", as you might expect.
Google already has: https://fonts.google.com/
Not all made by Google, but all open source.
If you filter by language you can see that some languages are not very well covered.
What conspiracy? China has announced they plan to land humans "around 2030", and the progress they have shown on a lander suggests that they are on track for that. They have heavy lift rockets capable of performing the mission with lunar orbit rendezvous (the same as NASA is planning), and they have already soft landed probes and rovers on the moon. They have a history of sticking to their announced timescales, which tend to be conservative.
Therefore the question is if NASA can get there first. Starliner is floundering, SpaceX's Starship is ambitious and they have a lot of work to do (man rating, in-orbit refuelling, and likely an unmanned trip around the moon). Then Blue Origin or SpaceX need to demonstrate a working lander, and that likely means an automated landing and return to orbit before a crew can go. NASA also needs to demonstrate lunar orbit rendezvous for whatever craft they end up using too.
It's December 2025, so they probably have around 4-5 years maximum, although China may go even sooner.
Really? A Nazi hellscape is pretty damn close to a Stalinist hellscape is pretty damn close to a North Korean hellscape is pretty damn close to a Pol Pot hellscape. The first of those is right wing. The rest are left wing.
HahaHAHAHhAHAHAHahhAHAHahHAHAHAhahAHHAHAHAHHA
*wheeze*
HahaHAHHAHAHAHAHHAhAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHA
We know the dog was unleashed, hence the fault is completely with the owner of the dog who didn't take care of them.
False. That's not how anything works. You might have been ok there if instead of "completely" you used the word "most of" a little to the left of there.
And the owner should be fined $500 as well since San Francisco as strict dog leashing laws.
This part is correct.
In every hierarchy the cream rises until it sours. -- Dr. Laurence J. Peter