Oh, and a "train" is a bit like 100 cars back to back.

"this belief is utterly false. To quote the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the recent Hobby Lobby case: 'Modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not.'"

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfo...

"We ... show that [the Shareholder Primacy Norm] is not a legal requirement, at least under the guise of shareholder value maximization. This is in contrast to the common assertion that managers are legally constrained from addressing corporate social responsibility issues if doing so would be inconsistent with the economic interests of shareholders."

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/p...

> Am I the only one that can't imagine any possible value an AI assistant would bring to a game?

I use AI assistants lots when playing games!

At the moment it's Minecraft. I want to figure how to build something, e.g. a golem farm. I look for tutorials online but (1) they're all videos which I hate watching, (2) they're all hyper-specific and concrete, "place this block here then that block there", but what I want to understand are the foundational principles so I can know how to adapt the golem farm to my own purposes -- what are the mechanics, how do they spawn, how does water flow, what is the SOLUTION SPACE of possibilities.

Gemini AI has been really good at this kind of thing.

The other time is when I get stuck, or want advice on how to make a character build to achieve a certain end. Once again the online advice is typically in the form of "walkthroughs", do step 1 then step 2 then step 3, in other words just one possible way to play the game, and it's too easy to accidentally read too far and spoil the rest of it. I don't want that. I like the feeling of openness and possibilities. I again ask Gemini, and it gives me advice on just the particular bit I'm stuck on, and is better at showing for me the available options.

Lua remains the commonest choice today for games to offer scripting/modding. It's pretty much the industry standard. (Outside C# for Unity).

"Opt out of all FOG DATA SCIENCE data sets"

What -- exactly -- does that do, how quickly, and what are some of the side-effects?\

Underneath, it says "You will be removed from all our data sets." And yet I doubt that very much. Surely there will be an entry in a database somewhere saying "Device identifier ________-____-_____-_____-_____ requested removed date-and-time _____ from IP address _____", etc.
And does that only retroactively remove data? Suppose they snarf up another dataset, bought from someone else or collected by themselves. Is that data also removed from their datasets, or does another removal request have to be made?

"Science is about a specific process: you make a hypothesis, you set up a test of your hypothesis, you test it, find it true or not and based on that your hypothesis becomes a scientific theory or a rejected hypothesis."

That's the junior-high version of science. The one done poorly on cardboard. It's sad that people still trot out the whole "it's a process" trope.

And yet that one sentence makes more sense than the rest of the post.

Betterbird doesn't solve all of Thunderbird's problems, but it *does* act a little more sanely in many respects, and the search works a bit better on my machines.

Why would you presume *that* from what was written?

What?

Ever since I started writing code in 1980, I've continually wondered if we'll ever reach a plateau where consumer-affordable tech is so good the average person won't need it to advance anymore. Eventually computing and networking will be fast enough, and storage will be huge enough, that we can all essentially have full copies of the Internet on our phones (or whatever), and intelligent, locally-running agents that can tell us anything we want to know, conversationally in realtime, including results that require analysis. At that point what would a faster or bigger computer do for you? Hardware and software will definitely get there, but getting permission to have and manipulate the content will be an even bigger barrier. I don't see a scenario like this happening as long as economics is still a force in the world. Food and electricity will probably be free before information will.

"Go away! Batin'! ...
Please."

is not politeness. What this plan *may* do is rotate out people until the ones who are genuinely polite get to the customer-facing positions. It may also devalue politeness to the point of being worthless. Regardless of the mechanism behind the scenes, people are going to be suspicious of whomever is interacting with them.

I see what you did there.

https://darknetdiaries.com/epi...

Fox News is just about always truthful. You just have to watch out for the tricks they use (on 95%+ of their stories)...

(1) non-representative selection. Headline "illegal immigrant murders local mother", which is true in this case, but they don't report the other 99 murders that went by immigrants, and don't report a general trend of immigrants causing less crime overall per capita. (I made up this specific example to illustrate their trick)

(2) report quotes: headline "Biden's senility was covered up, says person". They are 100% factually reporting that the person did indeed say this.

In both cases the reader is left with an untrue impression despite the stories containing only truth. It's because it's not the whole truth.