> America just sucks for foodies who don't have unlimited time to get through the slop.
I think by definition, being a “foodie” means you have, and enjoy finding, the time to sort the wheat from the chaff. Nobody has unlimited time for anything.
“I want to be be a ‘foodie’ but really I just want to be judgy” is a weak argument.
In America, google rating scores are straight up astroturfed to the point where the total number of ratings is far more important than their score.
When I travel to Japan, for example, I interpret a bad google maps review score for a location as a GOOD thing, because the average white tourists palette is incompatible with the local cuisine.
I can walk to basically any random place, anywhere in Japan, or France, or Singapore and get very high quality food that I don't have to worry about being full of bullshit. That's not true in America.
Yeah, it’s like saying Netflix doesn’t create value, or Universal Pictures doesn’t create value. I do not agree with the GP. As far as I can tell, openAI has created very, very negative value as of today, financially.
No no definitely not meant to be condescending; our ui paradigms don't align with users that just want to get stuff done. See what dayvid writes, too.
and everyone's being sold on this tech being super magic but to some questions there is an irreducible complexity that you have to deal with, and that still takes effort.
> Rust needs to mature a little more, stop changing so fast, and move further toward being old and boring.
Talking about C99, or C++11, and then “oh you need the nightly build of rust” were juxtaposed in such a way that I never felt comfortable banging out “yum install rust” and giving it a go.
Other than some operating systems projects, I haven’t run into a “requires nightly” in the wild for years. Most users use the stable releases.
(There are some decent reasons to use the nightly toolchain in development even if you don’t rely on any unfinished features in your codebase, but that means they build on stable anyway just fine if you prefer.)
Good to know, maybe I’ll give it a whirl. I’d been under the (mistaken, apparently) impression that if one didn’t update monthly they were going to have a bad time.
You may be running into forwards compatibility issues, not backwards compatibility issues, which is what nightly is about.
The Rust Project releases a new stable compiler every six weeks. Because it is backwards compatible, most people update fairly quickly, as it is virtually always painless. So this may mean, if you don’t update your compiler, you may try out a new package version and it may use features or standard library calls that don’t exist in the version you’re using, because the authors updated regularly. There’s been some developments in Cargo to try and mitigate some of this, but since it’s not what the majority of users do, it’s taken a while and those features landed relatively recently, so they’re not widely adopted yet.
Nightly features are ones that aren’t properly accepted into the language yet, and so are allowed to break in backwards incompatible ways at any time.
So the whole crypto anonymity thing isn’t actually real? As it turns out, tracing people is still easier than tracing money? Decentralized economies are run by criminal enterprises?! We aren’t safe!?!
Wonder how this whole concept overlays onto LLMs, with a lot more money on the line and a lot less regulation.
You're probably joking, but even if crypto was totally anonymous, running a massive criminal human trafficking empire in the real world is very non-anonymous.
Good old police work still works. Because people need to talk to each other to do stuff. The only time anonymity helps is if you can pull it all off solo, and mix the funds enough to not be traced as well as cover tracks well enough.
Crypto anonymity is still possible if you don't plan to spend your ill-gotten millions or billions particularly quickly. But, of course, you don't get to having a massive active criminal empire that way.
The coke recipe has never been patented, afaik, and similarly certain high-end things were patented only because the main company was hiring a subcontractor to do something. For example, Samsung flat out copied iPhone exactly almost.
So, my thinking is that there could be less patents, because they’re less likely to share the technology and patents might let others copy stuff.
Samsung didn't copy the damn iPhone. This is revisionist history. HTC was on the scene for popular Android smart phones before Samsung, and they also didn't copy the iPhone. Early Nokia Symbian devices were on the scene before HTC and they also didn't copy the iPhone. Touch screen phones were going to happen. Apple made the first, popular one, but they were going to happen.
We’re talking about transfer of critical technologies or knowhow, and how company relationships lead to such situations. Not Apple vs Android contents or how touch screen phone were already meant to be. A lot of industrial countries fail to manufacture good phones, not because they don’t have the capacity but they lack the knowhow.
Samsung was the original manufacturing partner for Apple, which allowed them to amass incredible amount of knowhow to create their own, and before that they were not even in the phone market much, yet alone launch their own phone.
In the initial years HTC was one of the biggest Android manufacturers and their phones didn't really copy the iPhone.
Samsung was just better at marketing and other business aspects.
> and before that [Apple] were not even in the phone market much, yet alone launch their own phone.
This applies to Apple, too. Samsung learned how to make them. As did HTC, Sony, Huawei, Xiaomi, Oppo, OnePlus, etc, etc. Turns out, making smartphones is a very competitive business, but a lot of companies were good at it, at least for periods of time.
Are you tracking that harvesting REM is a nasty business with a lot of “don’t look” environmental impacts? As such, most countries don’t do it, or have an infrastructure for it.
I really cannot tell if this is sarcasm (seems not?) or trolling (sounds like it).
How are we reminding China that the US is a big dog? By imposing tariffs? By demonstrating our ability to do work domestically that they believe us unwilling or incapable of doing?
What does this even mean, to be a big dog in the modern world? It seems more like a large ship listing to one side … if it collapses there will be a lot of small ships damaged in the wake.
Remember, Mommy,
I'm off to get a Commie,
So send me a salami,
And try to smile somehow.
I'll look for you when the war is over ---
An hour and a half from now
I've seen US numbers along 70-80% is imported. That leaves 20-30% domestic. Some of the REEs are 100% imported, so that's a different issue. But you seem to be implying that the US is 100% importing all REEs with no domestic production at all. That's not true. Yes, some production is slowed due to environmental issues. Some of it is a different nature along the lines of "why mine yours when you can buy someone else's". You keep yours in the ground until you have to get it. You have some small production just to keep the know-how, but you keep the stove down to a simmer from a boil.
> Some of it is a different nature along the lines of "why mine yours when you can buy someone else's". You keep yours in the ground until you have to get it.
My understanding is that a large part of the issue is processing capacity/ability - not mining of the ore. In fact, a significant amount of ore mined in the US is sent to China for processing. I don't think it's a simple case of the US standing up some processing plants in 1-2 years. If that were the case, wouldn't you think it would've happened by now? Is US leadership that bad that they failed to address this risk? Or - more likely - is it because solving the issue will take a lot more than some quick investment?
This is a huge issue for the US MIC. Plans (e.g. with regard to Iran) are going back to the drawing board for sure.
> Is US leadership that bad that they failed to address this risk?
I mean, quite obviously? Borne by the simple fact of... here we are discussing it?
It doesn't matter how easy, quick, or hard it is right now. What matters is leadership is so bad it was allowed to reach this point to begin with, and even a decade ago it was immediately obvious that it was a giant vulnerability that has not even started on beyond corrected in any meaningful way.
Uneducated conclusions like seeing 70-80% being imported means losing access to the exporters would be devastating? Seeing those numbers shows exactly how far away the US is from being self reliant? See how it means that the US is in a weak negotiating position, and that any bolstering from the orange man is pure bullshit? Please, enlighten me where these uneducated conclusions are wrong.
I think by definition, being a “foodie” means you have, and enjoy finding, the time to sort the wheat from the chaff. Nobody has unlimited time for anything.
“I want to be be a ‘foodie’ but really I just want to be judgy” is a weak argument.