As if interstate/international business doesn't already involve keeping track of which timezone the other party's in?

I'd note that eliminating Daylight Saving Time doesn't require Congressional involvement. Any state can do it by simply declaring they will no longer use DST. Then they're on standard time all year, no changing clocks anymore. It's only eliminating Standard Time and going to DST all year that requires Congressional action.

As for daylight hours, for most of the year we get plenty of sunlight hours in the evening even on standard time. Between eliminating the headaches of the clock change twice a year and the demonstrated improvements from better alignment with normal sleep cycles, that seems to outweigh the short-term complaints about going to all-year standard time. People always complain about any change regardless, we'd hear the same complaints about switching to all-year DST, so I don't see any merit in considering the complaints qua complaints when deciding. The basis of the complaints, yes, but those boil down to "I don't like it." and only apply to a few weeks once a year (at the other switch the complainers get more of their preference) and that's not a very solid basis for ignoring the benefits.

Repost with paragraph tags:

I wouldn't mind a required label for it, like the explicit lyrics warning on CD's. Its laguhable to think AI isn't used in games. What are they going to do, have an actor in India mechanical turk every pretend person? That was never a thing. "Make 1000 varying zombie skins" is a fine job for AI.

Who are you going to pay to sit around and draw up 1000 NPC's? Of course there's AI in games.

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/do... [ieee.org] Abstract from 1990: An experiment was conducted where neural networks compete for survival in an evolving population based on their ability to play checkers. More specifically, multilayer feedforward neural networks were used to evaluate alternative board positions and games were played using a minimax search strategy. At each generation, the extant neural networks were paired in competitions and selection was used to eliminate those that performed poorly relative to other networks. Offspring neural networks were created from the survivors using random variation of all weights and bias terms. After a series of 250 generations, the best-evolved neural network was played against human opponents in a series of 90 games on an Internet website. The neural network was able to defeat two expert-level players and played to a draw against a master. The final rating of the neural network placed it in the "Class A" category using a standard rating system. Of particular importance in the design of the experiment was the fact that no features beyond the piece differential were given to the neural networks as a priori knowledge. The process of evolution was able to extract all of the additional information required to play at this level of competency. It accomplished this based almost solely on the feedback offered in the final aggregated outcome of each game played (i.e., win, lose, or draw). This procedure stands in marked contrast to the typical artifice of explicitly injecting expert knowledge into a game-playing program. Published in: IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks ( Volume: 10, Issue: 6, November 1999) https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/do... [ieee.org]'

I wouldn't mind a required label for it, like the explicit lyrics warning on CD's. Although its laguhable to think AI isn't used in games. What are they going to do, have an actor in India mechanical turk every pretend person? That was never a thing. Who are you going to pay to sit around and draw up 1000 NPC's? Of course there's AI in games. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/do... Abstract from 1990: An experiment was conducted where neural networks compete for survival in an evolving population based on their ability to play checkers. More specifically, multilayer feedforward neural networks were used to evaluate alternative board positions and games were played using a minimax search strategy. At each generation, the extant neural networks were paired in competitions and selection was used to eliminate those that performed poorly relative to other networks. Offspring neural networks were created from the survivors using random variation of all weights and bias terms. After a series of 250 generations, the best-evolved neural network was played against human opponents in a series of 90 games on an Internet website. The neural network was able to defeat two expert-level players and played to a draw against a master. The final rating of the neural network placed it in the "Class A" category using a standard rating system. Of particular importance in the design of the experiment was the fact that no features beyond the piece differential were given to the neural networks as a priori knowledge. The process of evolution was able to extract all of the additional information required to play at this level of competency. It accomplished this based almost solely on the feedback offered in the final aggregated outcome of each game played (i.e., win, lose, or draw). This procedure stands in marked contrast to the typical artifice of explicitly injecting expert knowledge into a game-playing program. Published in: IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks ( Volume: 10, Issue: 6, November 1999) https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/do...'

It's this moral panic over water and power for datacenters - results in people going too far to prove a point.

As long as the inflation of your assets beats the inflation of your expenses, sure. People love to say "$1M isn't so much anymore anyways!" If you have $1M in the S&p500, you have 3.7% of that ($37K) invested in the energy sector. Returns on the energy sector: 61% over the 12 months ending 10/29/2026 - a $22,600 gain. That's a lot of gas money! But yeah, you have to be invested and have equity in the system. Then even the bad things have a silver lining quite often (or in this case, a minor windfall).

That's just not the case

https://thehustle.co/hs-fs/hub... 1/6 of US households now have over $1M in net worth. There are millions of us all over, living comfortably in retirement, balances go up and down but mainly up. Stick with investing and towards retirement it and your annual growtih will likely dwarf what your salary ever did. Buy and hold low cost index funds, it works.

Ultimately your tech gets outmoded, then you have to act. "Searching" is a big waste of time compared to just having your question answered.

I keep getting banned, and I don't even know why. Then log in with an old account and they ban that, for 'attempting to circumvent the first ban.' Do that a couple times and the weeklong ban because a perma-ban for "repeatedly" doing all the above.

It's such a joke, they go hyperbolic running some story that Elon Musk banned somebody from Twitter. Then they ban like crazy at the drop of a hat.

Even if AI didn't "funadamentally" advance at all for the next decade, human/AI interaction will be revolutionized by the end of that time through that use of AI alone. Every phone I get, I hate re-learning the menu structures. That is so over. From now on it should be, "hey google - in 3 seconds take a photo with the flash." Of for cars of course GOOG has Waymo. "Take me to Safeway." done. Not to say that alone would justify the AI-driven valuation of today's stock market, but even that would be a big thing. Much more important than the XeroxX Parc "miracle demos" people have been playing up for the last 50 years.

Disagree, you're incentivizing insiders to leak information. What do you think of the rash of stories along these lines? https://www.jpost.com/israel-n...

Big difference is investing is a net positive. It is possible for everybody to win, and in fact over time, most do. That' plenty of difference to affect public policy.

You are incompetent... at AI. You've never even made a good faith attempt to utilize it productively. That is the definition of willful ignorance.

The thing to look for is how they go about solving a problem. That's the key. Coding is easy. Figuring out what the problem is and how to go about solving it, that's the hard part. Especially given that the problem the user says they need solved is often not the problem they actually have.

By definition, because it's vibe-journalism pandering to the fad-trend of the moment.