Exactly. Just because a design is new with shiny gadgets does not mean it is automatically better than what has been previously on sale.
The sooner the newer generations understand this idea is nothing more than pure marketing hype, the sooner we can break away from and reject the enshittification.
The important thing is that some dingbat academician got a publishing credit.
I was going to say that I never thought the day would come when anti-intellectualism when come to slashdot, "news for nerds, stuff that matters." And then I noticed your slashdot id is even lower than mine, so you've been here a while.
A stark reminder that things aren't actually getting worse, the idiots have always been among us.
Yours is a far more eloquent way of saying what I had intended to: why is this on Slashdot? Is there any relevance at all? I fail to see it.
If these athletes were coached by AI, well... maybe, but that's a stretch. But they're not; they are just taking more extreme measures to performance enhancement than other athletes. And while I know (and employ) some smart jocks, I had the same experience as you in secondary school, because I, too, was not a jock.
> Disney's gotta nail the sweet, sweet merchandising.
Problem is that kids aren't generally buying Star Wars toys anymore, adults are, and they are increasingly detached from the new parts of the franchise.
Since when is it supposed to be a relative ranking? Whether or not you learned and understood the material has nothing to do with anyone else in the class.
Only recently has it been anything other than relative ranking.
He's the CEO of a company whose value comes entirely from being a meme. Who do you think is going to run it? Also, he can't legally answer a lot of the questions they were asking him.
What questions that they asked, for which he said the answers were on the web site, can he not legally answer?
He clearly had an axe to grind with CNBC, given his multiple passive-aggressive mentions of how they predicted his downfall.
The one interviewer appeared to strike a body blow when she asked if his motivations were tied to a performance-based compensation package. All of GameStop's flailing malarky makes sense through that lens: the CEO was trying a hail mary, 'cause otherwise he gets didly-squat. Part of that malarky is claiming to own 5% of eBay when, as the main interviewer pointed out, most of that so-called ownership was through derivatives. This guy's a fraud. Time to short GameStop.
The interview shows the CEO is kind of a jerk. He probably shouldn't be put in situations where communication is a requirement, like public interviews that are intended to help achieve an aggressive goal.
It's like he didn't understand he was on air during the conversation, despite the host clearly calling out that there was an audience listening.
The stark response from eBay is certainly understandable, having seen the interview.
Agreed that the Mach-E is a terrible name. But how did they screw up such a guaranteed out-of-the-park home run with an electric Mustang? I mean the whole image of the Mustang is a sporty performance vehicle for the young and stupidly lead-footed. Mustangs are classically known for acceleration and EVs are wickedly good at that. I mean, if Ford were to create a 1965-styled electric Mustang, I shudder to think how many boomers would buy them. They were the dream car of an entire generation.
Ford, are you listening?
What if you write a bunch of random noise of the same file size to weights.bin
The way you describe it isn't really how it works. It doesn't rewire your brain in an active sense so much as introduce elasticity for your brain to rewire itself. This is especially useful when the brain has gotten itself into a doom loop of depression or anxiety. The psilocybin allows you to break out of the doom loop and start your brain on the path of healthy development.
That sounds great. However, anything that causes anatomical brain chages that persist after a month, with a single dose, would be, by me, considered unacceptably risky. I'm not saying that it's by default considered bad, both you and the paper are talking about positive changes, and that's good. I'm saying, "risky," as in, I don't know what negative effects haven't been identified and I'd need a much more complete understanding before I'd be willing to try it.
Most of the positive effects are in reported well-being, but I really want to see more cognitive tests. The tests on cognitive flexibility is a great start, but we really need a barrage of tests here: mathematical ability? Short-term *and* long-term memory? Spatial thinking? Are there *any* cognitive functions that are negatively affected here? It's important to understand this with anything that has this type of long-lasting effect.
If it's as effective against stovetop fires as the KMPH video indicates, some kitchen manufacturer should license this tech and build it into their vent hoods. Some sizable percentage of house fire start on stovetops, so killing them off early would be a good thing.
This will wreck some customers. Expats overseas without vpn access. Anyone working or living in a remote location without internet access. Military around the world, both on land and on sea. Maritime workers on ships.
Basically take a bunch of people who rely on gaming devices for their entertainment because of the remote nature of their job or home, and cut off access to stuff they already paid for. Well thought out plan, if the plan is to get people to switch to a different company's products.
As a friend of mine in an uncharacteristic fit of insight once said, as long as there is a decision point that can be discovered, yes and the code goes this way, no and the code goes that way, it is in principle possible to write a patch to circumvent any DRM.
Here, there is a timeout test.
Need I say more?
Each honest calling, each walk of life, has its own elite, its own aristocracy based on excellence of performance. -- James Bryant Conant
