They are not mistakes. They are part of the (unethical, immoral, and illegal) business model. When one runs a shop, one is legally (and ethically) obligated to have enough employees to ALWAYS have correct prices on the shelves.

ARM should become a public utility

Warp is an attempt to modernize terminal apps and looks like a good start.

How is this in any way sneaky? It is in the news that they will find your pool and everyone installing a pool in France knows it will increase their taxes. The person trying to avoid paying the (small) taxes on their pool is the untrustworthy member of the community.

Many people don't have those few hundred extra dollars, nor the capacity to generate those few hundred extra dollars. So without a mechanism to help them and the rich who also suffer from the stratification are no closer to an improvement for everyone.

"I'm just against forcing established neighborhoods of single-family dwellings, "

Established neighborhoods of single-family dwellings are, in fact, "forced" creations (through zoning etc) that have caused a certain amount of the problems we have with stratification. One can rarely solve a problem that was caused by a "forcing" without an opposing "forcing". Pretending the current "forced state" is actually a natural state, which it is not, is just an excuse to avoid trying to solve the problem.

Then you can work with OpenMP code with the gnu compilers that brew installs. Very similar to using them from Linux.

brew install gcc

18 years old? Try 5 years old https://museum.wales/articles/...

From the bill "IF THE PERSON MAKING THE VIDEO RECORDING IS
8 WITHIN EIGHT FEET OF WHERE THE PERSON KNOWS OR REASONABLY SHOULD KNOW THAT
9 LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY IS OCCURRING,"

Say a cop is kneeling on a guy's neck for nine minutes, and another cop is standing 8 feet from the killer cop, telling people to back up. The person with the cellphone is now 15 feet from the killer cop yet is in violation of the law because the other cop is clearly involved in law enforcement activity (that is, preventing bystanders from trying to stop the murder of a minority).

You scatter a few cops in a crowd no one can film within 30 feet of a police murder. The objection to the law is due to its vague and ill-defined term "law enforcement activity" and thus would need to be struck down by the courts, not because of the specific "eight feet". One is already not allowed to interfere in law enforcement activity, so the law is also not needed and is clearly designed just to prevent filming.

Clarence has no world view and his perceptions are deeply flawed; he couldn't care less about the topics he votes on; his only goal is to own the libs because he blames the "libs" for the misery of the first 43 years of his life. https://www.businessinsider.co... Certainly hard to believe, but it is definitely the model that best fits the observed data.

And yet most minorities that cops kill are, at most, accused of non-violent crimes -- selling single cigarettes, change lanes without a turn signal, owing child support, etc. So clearly the police take these crimes seriously.

So Tim is proposing what Apple is doing for their user data but run as a public utility. You own your data and you decide who gets to see, and add to, parts of your data.

The exact technology to do this is not so important. What is important is:

You own the data and it is portable for you to move.

The data is unhackable.

The data is not available to government prying eyes.

No one can monetize the data without your explicit permission.

Large amounts and small amounts of data are managed efficiently.

10 years ago, one could actually make this statement (even though it is and was wrong) with a straight face. Given how the vast majority of conservatives flocked and cling to Donald Trump, the argument becomes so laughable even a 14 year male can't take it seriously.

"When half of the evolved psychological mechanisms of social perception and understanding are essentially unavailable to one's subconscious intuitions and conscious reasoning one is left with no cognitive alternative for understanding people who think differently but to conclude that they're afflicted with some sort of mental dysfunction." The other "half" of conservative's "evolved psychological mechanisms of social perception and understanding" ARE mental dysfunctions. Come on, the fact that one finds vomit disgusting (which 99.999% do) means that one finds someone slightly different from you having the same rights as you disgusting? This is not a moral foundation; it is a profound, unjustified, distortion of the biological imperative to avoid vomit (since it can make you sick).

The reason conservatives can predict how liberals will respond is because liberals are (mostly) consistent and (mostly) reasonable, hence it is (mostly) clear to anyone how they will respond. Conservatives are a soup of completely inconsistent (contradictory) beliefs and unreasonable explanations for their beliefs, hence unpredictable.