All your complaints? They're not Java. Java kept in it's own little sandbox. Java applets sucked and were solution looking for a problem outside a few novelty browser games. However, Java has been absent for browsers for almost 20 years. All the vendors removed support 10 years ago now. It began a very steep decline once the iPhone was introduced and Apple refused to support it.

Java has been a server side technology since the early 2000s. It doesn't even render HTML very much any more. It only processed backend-requests....far more quickly and efficiently than it's competitors. Your complaints are about JavaScript! It's a shitty language, but even moreso, abused by morons who don't follow common sense.

To this day, I still don't understand why they want to load 100s of scripts remotely and make 100 REST calls to render a page that's not even tailored to the specific user. Back in the server-side rendering days, there were a lot of jackasses, but at least the page rendered remotely and was sent when it was done...you can switch tabs and return once the tab said the page was loaded.

Loading a webpage shouldn't bog down a $4000 MacBook Pro...but the shitty front-end dev community said "M4 should easily be able to load my stupid and simple website?"...."Challenge accepted!"

It's almost as if the front-end community likes their users to suffer with their horrible billion level JavaScript frameworks that in the end, render a very dull page. Resume-Driven-Development at it's finest!

I've been into working out since I was a child...was born with the obesity gene and have to workout hard to be less of a fatty. Now all the execs are into biohacking, fitness, MMA, etc and won't shut up about it...quoting Huberman, Attia, and everyone else on Rogan. The most obnoxious is Pavel Tsatsouline...if another annoying exec talks to me about kettlebells, I'll fucking throw one at him.

It's fucking depressing...these guys used to see the hope and promise in technology and devices and making the world a better place with our actual skills and making small details of our life better. Now they're more excited by pipe dreams of longevity, flirting with MAHA beliefs, and largely unattainable dreams and wishful thinking of immortality and looking like male models while being tech execs and engineers.

Some of it is personal...I liked not having many coworkers at my gym, my quiet space, that thing that made me a little different...and I don't like being gym-splained by someone 1/4 my size in hallway conversation. But on the bright side, it brings costs down for protein powder and lots of new research into performance enhancing drugs.

That aside, what is additionally depressing about AI, if it actually worked, is they cede their skills to this magic box. Instead of solving their problems, they want the AI to do it for them, like their mommy. But regardless, 8 years ago, we were all trying to build things, with our skills, to make the world a better place. Now most of us are unsure how much longer our jobs will be relevant...and instead of building tangible change with tech, like clever devices, they're escalating to impossible dreams...AGI, eternal youth, drugs that mimic exercise (yeah, there is a promising one being evaluated), and whatever bullshit MAHA fans are pushing.

Is it a coincidence that every AI advocate I know was pitching bitcoin and wouldn't shut up about it 8 years ago? Did they "surrender" their cognitive abilities or never have them in the first place? I work for a large company that has gone all-in on AI. We've used ML models for decades legit reasons in our products for decades. We've given every programmer a generous amount of LLM AI time with all the major vendors. About 10% of the AI users are religious advocates...meaning that they won't shut up about the wonders of AI, but are talking about fictitious AI, not Claude or OpenAI.

AI is now a religion. Instead of being evaluated logically for the pros and cons, it's being evangelized based on pretend promises. The advocates are telling you how AI will bring in a brave new world of a glorious future and they're riding it. Realists, like me, use AI...are happy when it works...but also notice when it fails...which is pretty often. At work, I have to be quiet about it because I'm over 40 now and the advocates tell management that doubters are just dinosaurs who lack the intellectual capacity to embrace LLMs.

My response is, I'm not telling you that Claude writes shit code...the compiler is....because the shit it generated doesn't compile...the runtime exploding because Claude has no fucking clue what it's doing is saying it's shit code. People who use your products say it's shit because it is breaking on them and often quite slow

I've known some of these guys for over a decade, sometimes at past jobs or from school. They were always a bit delusional and optimistic. About half of them are dumb as shit and the other half just suspend reality...imagine the world of tomorrow instead of their deliverables today. The majority fell for the bitcoin bullshit. I don't think that is a coincidence.

From day 1, I knew something wasn't right with bitcoin. It honestly reminded me of EJB. So many were telling me bitcoin and EJB were amazing, but I'd respond with what I thought was the most logical question...OK, so when do I want EJB vs everything else?...or when is bitcoin better than current monetary systems? No one could give me an answer as to when to use one vs the other. They'd tell you how it works...but I don't care about how. That's fun trivia. I care about when...when do I do it this way?...when do I do things the old ways? In both cases, the answer neither...they're both expensive catastrophic solutions looking for a problem that caused huge, tangible damage to the global economy.

If you view AI as a tool that may or may not help you, you're an intelligent rational human being. If it's your religion?...well, you're just like the Scientologists, only with less sexual abuse. At least the Scientologists are getting laid.

An alternate theory...they need GLP-1. Say you're James Marsden (Cyclops from X-Men and a TON of other small roles). You're well liked, a familiar face, but not a household name. Your whole thing is being handsome. No one wants James Marsden with a dadbod. If he was a software engineer?...a small gut would be normal and fine at his age. However, he needs to take his shirt off....even if he doesn't?....he doesn't want to risk getting out of shape because the next role may want him hanging out at a beach or doing a nude scene.

He makes a fuckton of money based on looking nice...so perfect hair, plastic surgery on the face, every male beauty treatment under the sun, every performance enhancing drug. Literally millions of dollars are at stake...even if he doesn't need the money, he probably has a small staff: an assistant, a nanny, a housekeeper. He's a small business, not a person.

I'd have no problem taking whatever drug needed to provide for my family and even the people depending on me. GLP-1 drugs are well studied and thusfar, quite safe. I am on one myself...the short-term side effects suuuuuck...but regardless....I don't think most actors are using this as a shortcut. If they can be lean without it, there'e no sense in being miserable with an upset stomach 2 days a week.

However, if they need a bit extra...it makes perfect sense. Top actors are professionals. They are willing to go above and beyond for a role...because if they don't, someone else will.

But regardless, just because some abuse it, doesn't mean it's OK to act with contempt to the drug. People like me do need it to get below 30% bodyfat. I think 30% is below most health major complications, like diabetes and heart disease, but does lead to worse sleep and joint pain. Going from 30 to 15 would make the last 20 years of my life a lot nicer and more productive.

Metabolism isn't deterministic. Your body has stores of fat, muscle, and tissue it can break down at will. 4 years ago, I started intermittent fasting. I carefully controlled my calories, worked from home, and ate the same food every day...just for time sake. I lost about .5 lb a week on average. I was working out nightly. I went from 240 to 195. Then it stopped...same calories in....same level of fitness and working out....now the weight started creeping up. Because I'm not a moron, I tried working out harder...cutting calories...that slowed the gain. Any mistakes led to a large gain. It's not deterministic. If your theory was correct, it should be simple to reduce calories in and increase calories out and still see fat loss. But...it wasn't. Many have experiences similar to mine.

OK, so maybe I'm a jackass?...and lying?...well, it happens to everyone in my family. It's genetic. No one in my family has ever been skinny, even as kids.

But that's me. The point is metabolism is an extremely complex multi-variable equation and your experience won't match mine. I know guys from high school and college that never worked out and lived off pizza, beer, and cigarettes and stayed slim. EVERYONE knows some guy like that. I know middle aged men who are like that (except the smoking because the 2020s are different than the 90s). They don't work out and eat whatever they want and they're a reasonable, consistent weight. Any EVERYONE knows some woman in her late 30s or older who seems to always do everything right and is always struggling.

Your fallacy is to assume what is true for you is true for everyone. I've never gotten a cavity and I just brush and see the dentist...mediocre flosser, etc. I know many who are FAAAR more diligent than I and they've had many. It's not deterministic. My teeth are not healthier because I am more responsible. I am responsible and lucky. They're even more responsible and unlucky.

I know throwing around words like thermodynamics makes you feel smart and superior and witty...but you're just fucking wrong...and you know this. What's true for you and your friends will not work consistently for everyone. If it was...I am confident obesity would see similar patterns to drug abuse.

Overeating is a vice...but so is drinking and drug use. Many abuse all sorts of substances. They try to get clean, it takes much longer than it should, but by the time they're 60, most are sober and clean. They succeed within 5-10 tries. Every fat person has tried a dozen different diets. They kinda work for a bit until they don't. If it was just pizza dips, getting skinny would be about as difficult as quitting smoking.

Talk to any expert. There are massive differences in hunger signaling and GLP-1 has really illustrated this. If your body is not telling you went to eat, you're going to have a hard time keeping a healthy weight. You ignore your body for too long, it goes into starvation mode and you end up overeating because you're fucking ravenous and a billion hormones are telling you to eat. Tirzepatide stopped the noise for me. I still have to wait until I'm dizzy, but at least I don't have a ton of noise when I wait too long.

A lot of my ancestors are white...and from cold areas. Just remember, not that long ago, evolutionary speaking, having a body that was eager to store fat may have been the difference between surviving a winter and not. It make senses from a biological perspective. However, rather than guessing evolutionary advantages, you need to accept...your experience won't precisely match mine or anyone else's.

So, while the majority may be fat from reckless behavior, the rest of us who aren't strongly resent the stigma and oversimplified bullshit that old people love to dish out.

I know 2 women in their 40s who died of lung cancer, never smoked...ran marathons, ate like saints...both were white collar workers, so weren't exposed to fumes...sometimes genetics just suck.

I've been on that page for 20 years....less fat than before, but still 30% bodyfat. Trust me, I've done it all, as have every member of my family. I've eaten so much meat, I'm starting to get sick of it. Beef and fish are super expensive these days and there's only so many ways you can cook chicken or pork before getting sick of it. I'm like Bubba Blue from Forrest Gump...only with pork/chicken instead of shrimp...pork chops, pork fillet, jerk pork, slow cooked pork, grilled pork, pork slow cooked in chipotle sauce, pork slow cooked in jerk sauce, pork cooked in asian garlic sauce, pork stir fried, pork chili, pork burgers...same for chicken. I've tried every variation...as well as cheap fish like canned salmon and tuna. I also consume a ton of whey and yogurt and eggs.

You're right that meat is an important cornerstone of a healthy diet. However, I'll go back to my perennial point: It's easier to quit heroin and smoking than to get skinny if you were a fat kid. If conventional logic had something that made a massive difference, it would be common knowledge and every doctor would be telling you it often. Doctors would be telling every patient...eat more chicken/beef/pork/salmon/etc.

I think you're right that if you don't eat a balanced diet, fixing that may help...and then you won't need drugs. Drugs are for once everything else fails. Once you go up to standard dose for a GLP-1 drug, you'll gladly go back to eating right if that's your only option. They make you feel so gross, approx 24h after injection.

I'll call your bluff. You're full of shit. Where can you do this? No respectable doctor does this and Ozempic, as of pretty recently, is not available compounded (legally). You can't get name brand drugs OTC. So is this like that Rolex I can buy outside a bodega in a bad neighborhood? There are a some clinics that are worse than major doctors, but insurance won't cover it.

Also, Ozempic is approx $500/month out of pocket. Who the fuck has that much money, but not the willpower to join a gym and eat better?

Look, you want to shit on the fatties, we get it. Do you feel better? Do you feel like a real man now? You've showed those fat fucks...they're not stoic Sigma men like you are! You've proven yourself to be superior to us all...do you feel better now?

Every responsible doctor prescribes drugs after diet and exercise fail. The drugs SUCK...hence why they're interested in this new one. I hate how I feel 24h after injection. Your stomach emptying slows down and whatever you ate ferments in your stomach. It's really gross...and yes, I am being coy about what happens afterwards. If I didn't need the drugs, I'd do anything else. Drugs are ALWAYS a last resort. If you can get the same results naturally, you want to do it naturally. All drugs have side effects and all I know of stop working after awhile. This is also assuming they're not causing long-term side effects, like cancer.

There are a lot of jackasses. I don't give a shit about them. If someone wants to eat themselves to death, there's nothing I can to do stop them and the good news is they're only killing themselves. They're not driving under the influence like a drunk or exposing you to second-hand fatness, like a smoker.

However, few fatties are jolly, especially if we've been that way all our life. We're told constantly we're lazy and stupid and slobs and we don't like the way we look and it's hard to get laid. I love getting blown more than I love fries. I love having my clothes fit nicely more than cake...most do. Every fat fuck I know has tried to lose weight. Most fail. Please stop and think about that.

Now compare weight loss to drinking, smoking, and drug addiction. They're very similar. People party and do stupid shit in their 20s. They usually slow down in their 30s and if they're still doing it in their 40s, interventions happen. Everyone I know with an abuse problem has tried to get sober in their 40, if not sooner: quit getting blackout drunk, stop the alcoholism, drug abuse, smoking. Most fail a few times and eventually get it right. But obesity?...far more responsible people who are far more motivated fail far more often.

It's easier to quit opiates and smoking: the 2 most addictive drugs I know of...than lose weight. If this was about willpower, it would be a lot easier to get skinny than quit fentanyl.

"Only yesterday, I saw a guy with lung cancer smoke. If everyone stopped smoking, there would be no more cancer, right?" Isn't it that simple? Additionally, if everyone trained as hard as Lebron James, they'd all be able to dunk like him, right?

Your anecdote is a moronic simplification of a complex topic you clearly know nothing about. You're welcome to judge them like an asshole, but by the same logic, I have the right to call you a clueless asshole. Do you feel like a big man for shitting on the fatties?

OK, so you saw a is couple who are a bunch of lardasses with self-control issues. They're fat from reckless behavior. These drugs are not for them. Drugs are for people who eat responsibly and exercise and do everything right, but aren't at a healthy weight. They're never Plan A. Every fat person of a certain age knows they need to improve and nearly everyone tries to once their weight goes from a theoretical concern and aesthetic issue to something tangible that shows actual symptoms and a threat to your life. Some turn it around, many (if not most) most who started off as fat kids don't.

What assholes like you fail to understand is that for some, they act like a jackass and they get fat. They stop acting reckless and they slim down. Most of them started off as normal-weight kids. But a rather large percentage of us were fat kids who ate even less than you did. Some bodies are eager to store every surplus calorie as fat, most aren't. Some people have reliable hunger signaling, some don't. There's a lot of genetic variation and biology is not deterministic. What works for you, may not for others.

I'll wager I'm leaner and fitter than you, but it's a fucking struggle and drugs are helpful. I've lived off salads and protein supplement for the last 10 years, gotten 30 minutes of cardio daily, typically cycling many miles. I've LONG stopped eating sweets and drinking soda and eating bread, etc for 20 years. However, until I was on drugs, my bodyfat was 30%. You can't tell because I workout enough to hide it and have 17" arms. Since tirzepatide, I've probably gotten it down to 25%. I look pretty good, but I workout and eat like a psycho and have a dadbod.

What drugs taught me is that my hunger signals are worthless. They go off too early, so I have to suppress them until I am light headed...if I get to the point where I nearly passout a few times a day and with drugs, don't get a spike in hunger and eating afterwards, only then can I slowly lose weight...and for starving myself to the point where I can't even focus my eyes or safely walk, I lose less than a pound a week....while living off salad, protein, few carbs, no sweets, etc...food has been fuel for over a decade for me, no eating out, no joy at meals, etc. Are those fat fucks like me? I am confident they're not, but again, the drugs are for people like me, not them

Metabolism is one of the most complex functions of the body and we don't know much about it. We're constantly learning new things. It involves a lot of complex signaling with peptides that are quite fragile and difficult to study. Once you identify them, they have to be injected because your stomach will ingest them, making testing all the harder. We have a lot to learn.

But until then, be a smug asshole if you want...I'll be sure to point out that you're a smug, clueless asshole.

Because the phone was likely built from components source before the AI-RAM-apocalypse, and if it's from a major vendor, they have better protection...but rest-assured, their costs will go up as well. We're all fucked, component-wise. Thank the big AI players for buying every chip they can find...using revenue passed among themselves in a circular economy, somehow hoping that if they just buy more hardware, their LLM slop factories will produce something somewhat useful, like they promised...instead of the garbage they're slopping out today, which falls far, far, far short of what they claim it does.

They'll get their money refunded...oh wait, no one fucking pays for that service. A quick google puts estimates of only 5% have paid. I've missed the dating apps, for better or worse, by meeting my wife in college, before they were a thing, but my single friends tell me OKCupid is a sewer of married men who don't want dating app charges appearing on the credit card statement and broke losers. Ever female friend of mine who tried it said they were instantly harassed by the lowest quality garbage men the local area had to offer....and LOTs of dick pics from strangers...and that ANY service offers a better experience.

So yeah...if you're not the customer, you're the product. No one is going to let you get laid for free. They want your data to resell as well as sell you ads. OKCupid is a shitty dishonest company....but I also have limited sympathy for the fake outrage..."OMG...you mean that free app that helps me smash isn't respecting my data and misleading what they're doing with it?"

Sorry, if I was single, the last thing I'd want to do is spend time looking for women too cheap to pay to find someone. If you can't pay $20 to meet your future husband...something tells me you are either too young for me to be dating or have issues that will surface later.

Finding out that OKCupid is not fully on the up and up is like finding out those hot dogs that roll on the heaters at 7-11 for hours, if not days, before serving are bad for you.

This is veering close into MAHA territory, in my view...treating minor lifestyle details and major health factors. You just stated a lot of what appears to be impressive scientific data. While I don't WANT microplastics in my blood, how can I quantify the actual risk? I know that's not YOUR job, you're just the messenger presenting what appear to be facts, but that's why I am skeptical. Having been burnt by bullshit science + media hysteria telling us red wine will prevent heart attacks and tooth decay causes them, I am not ready to get alarmed. You say, people with above-threshold level of nanoplastics are more likely to get heart attacks, but given I've heard a half dozen of these bullshit things in my life, I have to ask the correlation vs causation question.

Much like red wine drinkers...in that Americans who enjoy wine are more likely to be wealthier or have lower stress in life than those who don't (the poor can't afford it and blue collar folks drink other things). Are microplastics worsening their cardiac health?...or are people with more realistic contributors just likely to be exposed to more microplastics. For example, if you're poor, you're probably not replacing plastic food containers that's heavily worn down. And being poor or stressed out will kill you waaaay faster than microplastics can...I am sure we both can agree on.

So my question to the scientific community, and I know you're just the messenger, is can we show epidemiological among regions? I think it's safe to say that not every region is exposed to microplastics at the same rate. Do the Southern Europeans use as much plastic? When I visit France and Italy, they seem to prefer glass...do they have less microplastics in their blood than North Americans or the Chinese? What about Africa or rural Asia...do they have higher levels or lower ones? Can we see holistic trends there?

The world spent 20 years chasing down trying to figure out the Blue Zones paradox...only to find out it's just coincidence and bad record keeping. Food is not medicine. I know the MAHA crowd would like to disagree, but it's true. Abusive eating can be poison, but switching to the Mediterranean diet from an otherwise reasonable American diet is not going to cure your heart disease. Similarly, if microplastics really caused heart attacks, it would be quite easy to prove.

In the end, I know microplastics aren't good for you, but I also am not convinced they're highly harmful. I will wager that if scrutinized, the data will show a much stronger correlation between the classic heart disease factors, which to my knowledge, in order are: genetic predisposition, smoking and drug abuse (booze, illegal stuff), stress, obesity, being-out-of-shape, prescription-drugs(like ritalin) and legal stimulants...then a far, distant.....EVERYTHING else, including microplastics or environmental toxins.

In the end, I am all for avoiding microplastics, but I put that in the category of things that "MIGHT" be bad for you, but we're not certain it's significant, like artificial sweeteners, caffeine, non-organic produce, etc.

Everything you said is true about theoretical AI, but not about real-world AI...or at the very least Claude Opus/Sonnet 4.6. It hasn't improved in any measure that I can identify in the last 2 years. I've been using it every workday, by mandate from my employer. So I am not a naysayer...I'm a frustrated user.

Look, you can show me bullshit theoretical papers and press releases all you want. There's a simple test that will prove either of us right or wrong and that's the real world and the market.

ChatGPT was released nearly 4 years ago. By year 4 iPhones were largely successful and disrupted many existing industries. My favorite example was the gay bar scene was annihilated by grindr. Why overpay to go to a windowless bar, face potential discrimination, and deal with sexual harassment and frustration to date a limited pool...when you can just check for available dick on your iPhone? It was starting to disrupt cabs. It annihilated sales of GPS units and even cameras. And iPhones were EXPENSIVE and had a fraction of the penetration ChatGPT does. FAR more people have used ChatGPT than have even used iPhones today, let alone 4 years into their existence....yet few come back.

LLM-based AIs? The only people making money in this gold rush are the pick and shovel vendors. No one is launching new LLM services that people actually want (everyone hates chatbots). I can think of a dozen KILLER usecases for easy money if AI was as good as you said. For starters, how about resurrecting ancient video games? Epic could spend 20k of Claude's time and easily reboot a major video game, like Unreal Tournament in UE5....if the shit actually worked. EVERY compiler maker could optimize binaries further if LLM-AIs actually worked. While no one pays for compilers these days, every hosting company would love to make their binaries 20% more energy efficient...get more hosts on a machine, get better response time, etc. Or more obvious use cases are apps that convert legacy COBOL code or any other language to the modern language of your choice (rust/Java/C).

Put simply, LLM-based AI resembles bitcoin more than it resembles the iPhone or internet or even minor tech revolutions like cloud computing and big data. Right now, the only people profiting off it's introduction are the pick and shovel vendors...the AWSs, the nVidias, the AI providers. Once I see pioneering businesses doing useful things with AI, beyond selling AI, then I'll start believing the hype.

Compiled code does have to work perfectly. Code generally has to work perfectly. Does it have to be optimal? No...but code with errors is intolerable in nearly all scenarios.