Nobody asked for you either, and yet here you are.

This is deeply ahistorical.

First of all, let's admit that the problem is one of the West's creation. Great Britain and the USA and all of Europe are to blame for the existence of the state of Israel. But Israel has consistently and unambigously been a settler-colonial state for its entire existence, has broken international law for its entire existence, and has been the aggressor for its entire existence. It's a religious ethno-state that exists only to commit genocide against Palestinians.

So 1940s Europe and North America are to blame for Jewish people being forced to occupy Palestinian land, but certainly Israel as a government has been nothing but horrific the whole time. This is all well documented.

I learned my anti-Zionism from Jewish Women. Israel is a monstrous state, anad you're either a bad or uninformed person if you defend them. Period, end of story.

Some creators do both. Some of my favourite people to follow are artisans that do woodworking or metalworking or interesting sorts of crafting. I love videos of old Chinese dudes making or fixing teapots and stuff.

Hard to believe that AI is going to stomp those folks out--the whole point is I want to see what a skilled human can create in the real world. My enjoyment of the content is specifically linked to the fact that a human makes it and that I could either potentially make it or buy it for myself.

This is it, precisely. If I could buy a new EV for $12K I would absolutely do that. If buying a new EV means that I have to spend $60K then I am not remotely interested. EV vehicles have some problems that make them impractical as the only vehicle for most families. Those problems disappear completely if the vehicle is inexpensive enough so that it doesn't have to be your only vehicle.

China is currently giving EVs away, we are stupid for not taking them up on the offer. Eventually the U.S. auto market would adapt. I am quite sure that they could also make low margin EVs if they had the right incentive. Let's be honest, the American public would probably be willing to subsidize them as they made the change. However, instead we have rigged the entire system so that U.S. manufacturers are incentivized to only compete in the largest, most expensive, and least environmentally friendly auto markets available. It's no wonder that the rest of the world isn't interested in our cars.

I'm not trying to claim my work is IMPORTANT. I'm saying that politics is inescapable, particularly when a) money; or b) children are involved.

Just games, christ. Microsoft bought Activision-Blizzard for $70 BILLION. How is that 'not real'?

That's like saying music is 'not real' or movies 'aren't real'. Music, TV, movies, games. They're all culture. It takes a distinctly ignorant person to sit here and say otherwise.

Everything is political. If you don't think that merely existing is political, you've a) got your head buried...somewhere; and b) you're probably some affluent dude that doesn't have to consider other people.

Either way, fuck all the way off.

Like, it's deeply obnoxious to me as a game developer that you can sit and say that huge sovereign wealth funds buying up studios isn't political. That allowing huge anti-competitive mergers isn't political. That workers and their rights aren't political. That the work and art that goes into games isn't political. Even trying to stay APOLITICAL is a huge political choice and is frankly, very difficult to do. Who's allowed to play them, what we consider appropriate for kids, whether or not they cause violence (they don't, demonstrably, but it's still a political football)--these are all political questions.

Games are culture, and culture interacts with politics. Go look up something on why and when zombie movies come into vogue. The movies reflect back to us what our worries are. So too with games.

The games industry has been bigger than Hollywood for years now and you have the gall--or simplemindedness, you pick--to sit and tell me that this stuff isn't political? Man, gtfo and read a book or something. Stop wandering through life so ignorant.

Yes, it's called "D-K Posterboy-itus".

Congenital, I think.

Meet Pop.

I keep hearing it's great for boilerplate stuff. Okay, fair enough. But how much boilerplate code do I have to write before it becomes worth my time? I really don't spend much time bootstrapping files, and 95% of the time I'd rather just use a previous thing that *I* wrote that I know works.

Yeah, one of the things I like about Claude (and Gemini 3 as opposed to 2.5) is that they really clamped down on the use of "Oh, now I've got it! This is absolutely the FINAL fix to the problem, we've totally solved it now! Here, let me write out FIX_FINAL_SOLVED.md" with some half-arse solution. And yep, the answer to going in circles is usually either "nuke the chat" or "switch models".

Is even shooging against the law now?

Yeah, when thinking of the typical air fryer market, think "working mom with kids who wants to serve something nicer than a microwave dinner, but doesn't have the time for much prep or waiting". You can get those mailard reactions that microwaving doesn't really get you, nice crisping and browning of the surface that you normally get from an oven, without having to wait for an oven to preheat. I don't think anyone disputes that an oven will do a better job, but the air fryer does a better job than a microwave, which is what it's really competing against. They're also marketed as easy-clean, which again is a nod to their target audience.

How costs build up is really staggering. I'm getting into the business of importing 3d filament. In Iceland, it currently sells for like $35/kg minimum. The actual value of the plastic is like $1. The factory's total cost, all costs included, is like $1,50. If it's not name brand, e.g. they're not dumping money on marketing, they sell it for $3 for the cheapest stuff. Sea freight adds another dollar or two. Taxes here add 24%. But you're still at like $5/kg. The rest is all middlemen, warehousing, air freight for secondary legs from intermediary hubs, and all the markup and taxes on those things.

With me importing direct from the factory, sea freight only, I can get rid of most of those costs. Warehousing is the biggest unavoidable cost. If I want to maintain an average inventory of like 700kg, it adds something like $5/kg to the cost. Scanning in goods and dispatching user orders (not counting shipping) together adds like $2,50. And then add 24% tax (minus the taxes on the imported goods). There's still good margin, but it's amazing how quickly costs inflate.

Your "junk" is someone else's "must-have".
Your "must-have" is someone else's "junk".

I mean, from a horticultural perspective, there is some potential to gain more of other nutrients, in that if you have more energy, you can develop a larger root system, or generally more effectively, better feed mycorrhizal associations (fungal hyphae are much finer than root hairs, so can get into smaller cracks, and fungi can "acid mine" nutrients out of mineral grains - as an example, here's a microscopic image showing what they did to a garnet)

That said, yeah, in general if you can provide more energy, you expect the storage of "calories" to grow much faster than the acquisition of other minerals. Also, it's important to note that while more CO2 is generally good for most plants, more heat, or greater periods of drought (land dries out faster, monsoon belts spread) and flooding (atmosphere holds more moisture, monsoon belts spread) are not. In regards to heat as well, there's a lot of details. First off, though we commonly don't think about it, heat management in plants is critical. Their proteins are designed for function within an optimal temperature range, and to maintain it, they have to cool themselves down with transpiration, creating more water stress. Also it's worth noting that C3 plants (most plants) fundamentally don't tolerate heat as well as C4 or CAM plants (there's work to engineer C4 into some common agricultural crops... it's frankly amazing to me that they're getting some success, as it's not a trivial change).

BTW, the reason that plants grow better with more CO2 isn't what most people might think. The TL/DR is that the protein that sequesters CO2 so that (using ATP and NADPH from photosynthesis) - RuBisCo (the most abundant protein on Earth, something that has been evolving for billions of years) frankly sucks at its job. Something like 20-25% of the time (at normal CO2 levels), instead of binding with CO2, it binds with O2 instead ("photorespiration"), which means not only does it not sequester a carbon, but the plant has to *give up a carbon* to regenerate the RuBisCo. This is disastrous in terms of energy efficiency. And as a side effect, you also have to keep the stomata open more, which means more water loss. But as you increase the CO2 levels, the ratio between binding CO2 and binding O2 improves, and photorespiration waste drops. C4 plants "fix" this problem by instead of having RuBisCo directly bind CO2, they first bind CO2 into malate (with high selectivity), then the malate transports into bundle sheath cells, the CO2 is re-released, and THEN - in a high-CO2 environment - RuBisCo takes it up. This reduces photorespiration, but also introduces some more wasteful chemical conversions. (CAM plants to even further by storing malate inside vacuules - at the cost of even more energy - so that they can store it up during the night, and then use it during the day, which - although even more wasteful - lets them keep their stomata closed during the day to conserve water)

(BTW, there are some microbes that have developed a more efficient RuBisCo, but it's proving challenging to engineer it into higher plants)