Correction, the dystopian interpretation of the constitution purveyed by our current lunatic fringe Supreme Court is that they have the authority to do so. The constitution says otherwise, but at some point, our government stopped actually reading it.

One of the things I loved about the pine phone was the ability to boot from sd card. For something like foreign travel the ability to swap cards and boot a whole different image would be perfect.

You never could. Parents do their kids' homework all the time, or siblings, or friends. Ideally, teachers should give a large pile of optional homework. State right up front that although they will grade it, it will not count towards your final grade, and the grade on each homework paper will be given as a percentage of the problems attempted, not of the total set of problems. So if you do five problems and get them all right, you get 100, and if you do 50 problems and get most of them right, you get 90. At that point, the purpose of homework is primarily to help the students learn, rather than being primarily a way to evaluate the students. Give some participation points for doing some of the homework, but not based on correctness.

This has three benefits. First, the smart kids who understand the material quickly will do just enough to make sure they understand it and then will stop wasting their time, but will still have feedback on the work that they did do. Second, the teachers won't have to grade as much work from students who don't really need that much extra work. Third, no at-home cheating, whether by technology or by other people will distort their grades.

Obviously this doesn't work for everything — essays, for example — but for general homework, it's a big win.

You can certainly do that along with what I suggested, though I'm not sure how much difference it will make in the grand scheme of things.

Agreed.

It would me more like if the police could search your house at any time without one. They come to your house and you flush the toilet and they claim you flushed drugs with no evidence.

We have no evidence the person was involved in a crime, we simply know they destroyed data on a phone.

The argument is that you have no constitutional protections at the border crossing. Which is complete bullshit, but that's their position. Inovking the fifth amendment to not give up a password should be an option for all citizens at any time when engaging with US law enforcement.

Rather than destroy evidence, simply do not take your real phone out of the country. Take a burner phone. Wipe it on the way to the airport.

I would never hand a device that has access to my whole life to someone without a warrant and I wouldn't unlock it (no face ID, it's a password). So the I would take a burner phone with me while traveling internationally. Minimum tooling required for my travel.

That is not what they found. What they found is that if you spend 60 minutes doing the homework with AI, you learn approximately as much as someone who spends 60 minutes doing it without AI. If you spend 20 minutes doing it with AI, you learn as much as someone who spends 20 minutes doing it without AI. Etc. The only real difference is that the AI people get way better homework scores, and as a result, tend to stop spending as much time, and thus tend to learn less.

That's what this preprint study found.

On the other hand, the fraud losses are a lot lower, and as far as I know the transaction fee is the same, and the credit card company pays the 0.15% fee out of their cut. So while it theoretically *could* eventually drive up the rate in the future, I don't think that's happening currently.

100% this. Even a short 5-minute quiz with just a couple questions at the start of each day will do the trick. But you simply can't rely on homework scores to be a proxy of learning or time spent studying anymore. Brief daily quizzes on the previous day's material will force them to.

Also, It's not like students have the excuse of, "I couldn't study, I didn't have anyone to explain X to me" anymore. The very AI that they might otherwise use to cheat on their homework can also explain to them the things they missed in last year's algebra class that are blocking them from learning this year's calculus, or whatnot. Congrats - you now have an infinitely patient personal tutor who will spend hours dumbing things down for you until you get it. Now you have no excuse - learn the material. It becomes all about actually putting the time in.

Yeah. There's been widespread misrepresentation of this (preprint!) in the media. What they actually found: test scores correspond to how much time you spend doing homework, regardless of whether you use AI or not. Which should not be a surprising result! Of course, the AI people, esp. those who had been using AI for more than a few months, stopped spending much time on their homework, and then their test scores fell to match the non-AI users who didn't spend much time in their homework either.

The TL/DR is, in today's age, you cannot use test scores as a proxy of how much time a user is studying or knows the material.

There are of course some caveats, beyond the fact that it's just a preprint - notably that there's nothing to separate why the user started using AI to do their homework, so there's potential confounders in there. For example, if a student is in a poor family, maybe they had to get a job to help pay the bills. But working a job itself can lower test scores - for example, having to work late the night before an exam. So there are some confounder problems with the study. That said, I'm sure the general conclusion is correct: time spent doing the thing = amount of learning the thing (relatively independent of what tools you're using in the process).

If you need to squint to see nav instructions on a smartphone you probably shouldn't be driving in the first place. I've never once had any issues with what you are saying. Best of all you can change and update software and hardware whenever you want rather than being stuck with whatever vendor malware comes with a given vehicle.

We already know that there is water in permanently shadowed craters near the lunar poles. This has been well-proven by multiple missions, including the LCROSS mission that actually impacted the pole.

What we don't know is what the physical state is. Sheets of ice? Ice-coated grains of regolith? Deeply hydrated minerals? Fluffy snow? Layers of dust alternating with rock-like layers of minerals cemented together with cryogenic ice?

If they find water it will certainly put them at the forefront of moon science.

By the way, those articles seem fine. The first two are well established history at this point.

Just because it is sold cheap doesn't mean it isn't valuable. It may just be that people who value it don't know it exists, or it isn't available due to international shipping, or they won't start looking for years to come.

That's why I get scanned books onto the Internet Archive. Maybe nobody will care, but maybe someone will 10 or 100 years from now.

Competition is usually good. YouTube has been rapidly enshittifying, and there isn't really any alternative.