Inside the /. bubble, sure, that makes sense. But crypto badly wants to be mainstream and, demographically, it's a lot younger than this community is. You might be surprised at how few people under 30 maintain bookmarks or consume news from specific outlets intentionally.

I'm increasingly convinced that if you're running an AI interaction at all it needs to live in a container. Somehow the sci-fi wisdom of "no seriously, don't give an AI access to the internet" flew right out the window when AI could tell us when our boss' emails actually had something in them worth reading. I get that, but ESPECIALLY for software developers, if you're going to make use of agentic AI systems, you need to have a metaphorical (if not literal) moat around the agent before you just turn it loose.

That was true before we started talking about the security implications of an AI with privileged access coming under attack.

Maybe.
The classic case is Sickle Cell, which protects against Malaria.
Is eliminating Malaria a good thing? Not if it means giving everyone Sickle Cell Anemia.
Is Eliminating Sickle Cell Anemia a good thing? Not if it means wide spread Malaria epidemics.

As a pro-technologist I'm all for having the option to edit genes, but it's something that needs to be studied over generations to determine "goodness".

Yea, but those financial reasons were "dealing with the physical stresses is expensive" and "the shockwave causes damage and is annoying over populated areas so we can only really go M1+ over the ocean."

Also zero advantages of a blockchain, no? The whole point is when you don't trust the counterparty and need a record. But if this is fully controlled by a single entity and you know precisely who's settling and who you're trading with...what's the point? Any old database could do that.

What are the national security implications for the USA if Canadians regularly cross the border in to the US while driving their Sino-EV?

The US is paranoid enough to have banned DJI drones (in fact *all* foreign drones) on the grounds of "national security" because they could photograph sensitive locations -- but then again, couldn't a Sino-EV with its plethora of onboard cameras. Given that these Sino-EVs are going to be "chatting" back to their Chinese manufacturers, how are we to know that they won't be dumping screeds of sensitive image data right into the hands of the CCP?

Inquiring minds wish to know.

I'm in the UK so take this from that perspective - here, from what I see, no spaces have vanished and in fact they've increased.

Plenty of parks here, most places have a relatively easily reachable mall or shopping centre. Pubs still exist, coffee places are new (I'm speaking as someone who was a teen in the 80s, not so much of the coffee-type culture then). Bikes are back and with more infrastructure, gyms are bigger than ever and exist as a space to meet...it's all still around.

What's different is the alternatives to that. You can also talk to people online now, and to some extent that seems to be removing the drive to meet up in person. Not completely obviously, but it's there. Catching up with your friends over gaming groups in Discord, or just group message chat or whatever is completely common. Seems much less common to go round someone's house than it used to be when I was a kid and teen, but again - not exactly zero. It's more expansion of choice than reduction of opportunity.

Anyone wanting to build a gun really only needs some basic metal-working handtools and
set of plans.

I know I'd much rather have a Sten gun than a 3d-printed "one time use/explode" one.

So I'm aware that NVidia has the edge on AMD in terms of performance right now, so I'm not making that argument. It's more that nvidia are the unwitting drive-by victims of a Copilot shooting for me: one Windows co-pilot ad too far pushed me to move my gaming PC over to Linux, and AMD better supports Linux.

An OS migration on the consumer side also means a manufacturer migration to things that support the new target. Yep, only 3% of the market and I doubt NVidia's board would quake in their boots if they read my post...but it's true.

Since the introduction of ghost guns, homicides have been on the decline.
Does that mean ghost guns are responsible?
No. It's more likely that homicide rates are declining in spite of ghost guns, not because of them.

A larger percentage of gun crimes are being committed with ghost guns.
Does that mean ghost guns are responsible for gun crimes?
Again no. It's more likely that people who commit crimes decide to use ghost guns than people who have ghost guns decide to commit crimes.

If you don't like the second amendment, then campaign to change it. There's a procedure for doing that.

The bill of rights is a guideline for government actions, not an obstacle to get around.

Given the main article was paywalled, here's a summary of Go variations. Besides the minor stuff like 'where to put captured stones, cup or side', there's one fundamental difference: Whether to count area (count every stone towards score, aka Chinese counting) or territory (count empty points within your territory, aka Japanese counting).

This article is great, gives an overview plus specifics on 6 different rule sets in use: gomagic.org

Yeah, because shooting the driver of a moving vehicle immediately brings the car to a dead stop. Well actually it doesn't.

At the distance involved, there was no logical way shooting the driver would have helped. It seems folks are trying to argue that a driver who got shot will immediately move her foot from the accelerator to the brake pedal and do it quickly enough to matter. I simply cannot grasp the idiocy needed to hold this position. The most logical thing (and per law enforcement policy, as far as folks posted online and I have not seen refuted) would be to step out of the car's way, which he did. Since he could have and did step out of the car's way, that is pretty much all the proof needed to show that the shooting was not justified. This is aside from all the other procedural issues with what the guy did. [should never have been in front of the car to begin with; the stop itself was outside the jurisdiction of ICE; driver was demonstratively not blocking traffic as evidenced by the other cars passing before the ICE truck.]

Only time it makes sense to shoot the driver would be if there were enough time and distance such that disabling the driver is necessary to keep them from steering actively towards you while you got away. There was simply not enough distance for any of that to matter in this situation; shooting the driver can not meaningfully change the trajectory of the car in 1-2 meters.

Note that just because immediate execution was not justified does not mean that the driver was necessarily innocent. It's simply statement that if she were guilty of anything, she can be picked up later and face the music through appropriate due process. They already had her plates. Sane people don't want to live in a country where barely literate goons get to be judge, jury, and executioner on the spot.

Except for the doctored AI footage uploaded by some pot-stirring jerk, all the footage shows the guy was not in the path of the car at the time of the first shot. At worst, he got brushed by the mirror as it went past. Even if somehow you went through the twisted illogic needed to justify the first shot, the second and third shots were completely unnecessary. Any competent Law Enforcement Agency would investigate and discipline him for those. Denying medical care after the fact was also unnecessary and unethical if not illegal.

Not holding LEOs accountable for obvious misbehavior makes us all less safe. Stop encouraging such behavior.

Ya know who's not going to trade schools and community colleges? Rich people.

Old Reddit cloned this site, Slashdot. The founders are on record stating this in a 10th anniversary interview - they were aiming at Slashdot (and largely won). It's essentially a Slashdot clone with the ability to create your own topics, post your articles and the old uncapped karma numbers.

Slashdot limiting karma to 50 was an extremely good move.

Sure, but "pure fusion" bombs are pretty much science fiction at this point. Igniting fusion in LiDu requires a tremendous amount of energy and not an insubstantial flux of neutrons. You're not getting either of those things in a profile suitable for military deployment without a fission primary. It might be a small (maybe even less than a kiloton) primary but you're not getting the Plutonium or Uranium (or maybe Neptunium in some cases) out of there any time soon.