I think part of the problem for Lego is exactly the opposite - the "robot camp" crowd has moved onto more advanced/capable stuff. There's a million kits with Arduinos - or even "real computers" like Pis - and they're way more expansible and capable and interoperable.

It used to be that if you wanted a simple programmable microcontroller, you were in for a real confusing slog - and Lego could fill that niche. Now you have a million easy options. You can still use Lego products to build the physical bits of your device if you want - but they weren't bringing enough heat on the CPU/programming side.

Sure... but you don't need quantum networking (at any scale, anyway) unless you have quantum computers (or some other threat) to break current encryption methods.

Well that's all fixed now that they've got Windows running inside it.

Now you can run native apps in Electron.

Although there's some advantages to be gained by running inside a browser in the apps running within the Windows electron browser window app browser Windows windows.

Like... if you controlled for "total sugar" alone, how much of the "ultra processed" signal would go away?

Compare apples to apple sauce - surely the difference isn't the processing (mashing up the apples), it's the stuff added or removed after? Right?

Or sometimes I eat protein bars. They've been processed to hell and back - the resulting bar is barely edible goo. But the macronutrient balance is good - low sugar, lots of protein and fiber. Am I somehow wrecking myself by eating this unnatural, super-processed thing? If so, what needs to change about processing? Specific chemical agents or additives (or things removed)? What is it?

Because the non-rich, very busy people of the world are probably going to keep eating processed food that's cheap to produce, made of cheap ingredients, and shelf-stable. So let's make it better.

No - he means that these new copies aren't legal at all. Which they aren't.

If they were printing new "legal" copies of Black Lotus, that'd be breaking the "reserve list" promise. And the $250 price would make at least a bit more sense.

People have been saying this for years.. but it doesn't really correspond with reality. It's kind of getting silly now.

I mean, VR was tried in the 90s and failed because it, like... didn't work. The next time it was tried (significantly, anyway) was 2012 (when the Kickstarter for the original Oculus Rift started). It's mostly just kind of grown since then. There's a variety of products and headsets - but the original Oculus Rift CV1 still works fine. I don't know where or when we're imagining all these cycles.

To be fair, VR still suffers from a lack of software. I'm sure some people thought it would grow faster. Some people don't like it or regret buying. I think there's still a lot of unrealistic expectations floating around - especially with "metaverse" and what not.

But it works fine. Lots of people have been enjoying VR for 8 or 10 years now. It's fun.

I share my Netflix account. At one point it started saying something like "too many people watching at once", and we upgraded to get more concurrent users.
  That seemed pretty fair to me. I think that's as much "solving" as they'll get away with.

If they want to go further, then the people who share my account probably just won't have Netflix anymore (they don't use it much anyway), and I'll downgrade my Netflix account and they'll get less money. Or maybe even go back to "few-months-on", "few-months-off" (which we don't do now because we're sharing an account and I don't want to get a confused phone call).

Netflix isn't such an outstanding value proposition that people will just pay for it no matter what. I don't have anything against "streaming services" or their business model or whatever... I am "OK" with Netflix right now. But they're already very close to the edge of "not being worth it".

5 years back gets you a new'ish 1080ti (Mar 2017). Looking at a few games and composite benchmarks, a 3080ti produces about double the FPS in regular (not raytraced) games.

Fine I guess? But there's a lot of keyboard options at $200, and I have no idea why this is more newsworthy than the 100s of other computer related products that launch in a week.

Also, I think TKL is the better layout for programming, though obviously it's not a huge difference. I quite often get into a sort of two-handed rhythm when quickly editing semi-structured text/data, where having another set of separate, easy to find keys (insert and delete) available for copy/paste is quite helpful. And having a couple extra keys to bind (especially "pause", which is usually free from other functions) is handy too when doing stuff with heavy/full-screen type UIs.

Insurance can still be a good idea even if the EV isn't positive, as it's usually inversely correlated with your other investments. Lowering correlation is a very reasonable goal.

And if you think selling options is rigged, you're welcome to do it yourself and make your guaranteed money.

Back to your other post, computers are already better than humans at lots of things. Sure I could technically play chess (or compress a video file) the same way a computer does, but it would take me a thousand lifetimes to play my first game. Lots of people have made money doing algorithmic trading. The fact that these people managed to lose a bunch says something about them more than the capabilities of computers.

Yeah, certainly my experience is that Firefox UBlock Origin works much better than anything I can find on Chrome - though I haven't investigated that in any depth. I don't mind my current setup where I allow ads on most sites I use regularly (via Chrome), but bring out Firefox as an option if a site is abusive somehow.

Anyway, that's good news - I'm glad to hear Mozilla intends to preserve this advantage. Hopefully they aren't forced to "sell out" on this.

...but they shook my off by continually messing around with the UI, breaking plug-ins, and generally focusing development only on whatever would annoy me as a user.

Now I use it only for sites I'm a bit leery of or that have annoying ads. The Firefox UBlock Origin extension is still blocking ads/popups like a champ (making "totally legal sports streaming" sites usable), and it's nice to have a browser completely disconnected from my Google stored passwords and what not (something that is less clear with Edge, not that I see any real point to using Edge instead of Chrome).

So, given the above, I'm sure Firefox's next step will be to change how extensions work such that ad-blockers are broken, and then I'll uninstall it forever.

Ah yes, the libertarian kooks must be right!

It says so right here in their book, published by the libertarian kook company.

Like, shouldn't this be a headline advantage of telemedicine - the ability to connect with a doctor that fits your specific needs (including language) regardless of their physical location?

I can understand the complaints about the old DRM "purchase" scenarios, where they presented the transaction as "you're buying a copy" but what they delivered was a technologically hobbled rental that may or may not remain usable - and would likely fail in ways the consumer didn't understand. There was a lie there that needed to be exposed - companies were cheating people out of money by giving them false expectations.

And I am saddened that Public Domain has been cheated so many times. Again, there's a clear complaint here that Disney and other media companies have benefitted from public domain, but are unwilling to "give back". That feels like cheating, and it would be nice if more people pushed against that. Again, I get this case.

But in the case of Disney+/Netflix type services, they're up-front that you're paying for the ability to watch the content for a certain period - and generally they seem to be delivering on that. If you don't like the technology they're using, or you'd like commercial media to work on some other system... then complain or hope or whatever. But it's not like you're going to wake up one day and realize your investment in Disney+ has been stolen from you. It's hard to feel like they're doing something terrible or ethically wrong here.

It's hard to even think out a "slippery slope" sort of scenario here; there's reasonable competition, and there hasn't been big/successful efforts for those competitors to lock each other out of platforms or whatever. And while Netflix isn't, like... a saint or something, the rise of streaming services has led to people seeing a broader range of content - both in terms of stuff from smaller producers, and from different places in the world. How many Americans would have seen Squid Game or Money Heist in 2005? It's not exactly an indie paradise (like Steam is for video games), but it's better than older models.

If I could change something about streaming (especially Spotify), my push would be to move to "user-centric" payment models, to increase the amount of "money I pay" that goes to "artists I spend time with".