I have always been kind of hyper aware of <everything>. My wife and I only dated for 6 months before we got married in sept 2019 (second marriage for both of us, we knew what we each wanted). But I definitely felt a bit awkward telling her about what I thought was coming with covid in late dec 2019. She was a bit suspect at first but polite and just went along with it because we were newlyweds and she loved me and gave me the benefit of the doubt. Holy shit, most everything went how I said it was going to at least through June 2020. AFAICT, she's still convinced I'm from the future.
And what/if any arising issues are you currently tracking?
I’m also curious about your 12/2019 info sources. We had a postdoc in our lab in ~late 01/2020 that was obsessively watching the Johns Hopkins COVID tracker, so that’s when I was tuned into the inbound insanity.
Kinda like when someone said that instead of running for mayor, Bloomberg could have given everyone in the country $1M. A guest said it on NBC and Bryan Williams, nor the pundit had any intuition that it seemed grossly wrong. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/mar/06/msnbc/bad-...
Nice work! Out of curiosity, how are you deciding what the verse of the day is? i.e. is randomness weighted somehow? There are are ~31k verses in the bible, 23k in old testament, 8k in new testament. Is it 2.5 times more likely to be an old testament verse? Or, perhaps you're picking a testament at random, then a random book, then a random verse. Lots of ways to skin the proverbial cat.
Great question. It picks a random book first (out of the 66 non-Deuterocanonical books (so far)) and then a random group of 3 back-to-back verses from that book. That way it's not weighted towards books with more of verses, which I wanted to avoid. It doesn't try to equalize between old/new testament.
Since the whole point of this is to limit LLM token consumption, it'd be interesting to see the results of prompts that use it.
I've seen a ton of people who just paste a CSV into a prompt and expect it to work well because they don't know any better, but the results are typically hot garbage. It's too repetitive, it can't memorize and/or process such a big chunk of data. Asking an LLM to use pandas to iteratively analyze some CSV works great, though.
These kinds of results seem all too common. Like, why? Are companies just too used to using their general business attorneys for it, and those attorneys are just ignorant? Hungry for extra billable hours?
The answer, as succinctly as possible: cognitive dissonance.
This is exhibited in every human endeavor, but it's particularly acute, or at least more apparent to simple analysis, in business. In business, anything that diminishes the perception of value is a threat to earnings. Business people don't tolerate the existence of such perceptions in their minds. They readily adopt whatever mental state is necessary to deny realities that reveal a lack of value in whatever work product they sell.
In this case, someone demonstrated a weakness in a lock design. In the minds of the business people behind the product, this is impossible. Their locks are awesome. Best locks in the world! Therefore, the only conceivable possibility permitted, in their minds, is fraud or some other actionable offense that can be feasibly pursued in court.
The role of lawyers in this is a symptom, not a cause. Lawyers are paid to exhibit the necessary cognitive dissonance their clients require. Whatever aberrations or iniquities arise from this are simply denied by yet more cognitive dissonance.
Even if they know they would lose in court, lawsuits are expensive enough that threatening to sue or filing a lawsuit is often enough to get people without deep pockets to do whatever you want.
I don't know if that was the reasoning in this case though, considering that they didn't drop the lawsuit once it was clear that the youtuber wasn't going to give in to their demands.
I worked for a PoE lighting company for a couple of years. Yes, the ability to program your lights based on time of day, occupancy sensors etc was all nice for the end consumers. But the big advantage was that since it didn't use mains power, the owner of the building didn't have to hire a union electrician at eleventy gillion an hour to move some light panels around in a drop ceiling.
In general, no. And to be clear, this is my general understanding and I don't have the time to look up the specifics, but I'm pretty sure lidar uses a "carrier wave" in much the same way old telephone modems did, or your IR remote for your TV. The carrier wave is how these sensors don't get confused. If you've ever been in traffic, and you get a stray, one off "YOURE TOO CLOSE TO SOMETHING" when you in fact aren't, it is because a carrier wave from another car happens to line up and you have a collision (pun intended).
To be maximally fair to their argument, I think it is good to point out (not that it's the point that was made but that it's a good point to make) that 9,100 is a distinct departure from 0 when there are other numbers in the tens and hundreds. It's worth questioning the disparity and whether it's indicative of incorrect or misinterpreted data.
Not sure why I decided to comment specifically on what you posted given the fact that there are various levels of misinformation going on in this thread, but I guess yours is the most blunt.
Anyway read the article you linked to again, you completely misread it.
It's clearly documented that Mossad committed terror attacks against Jews across the Middle East to terrorize them into fleeing. Iraq, Egypt, etc. Zionist authorities had to bribe, maneuver and scheme to get many of these communities to make the journey. Not a conspiracy - you have actual Jews like Naeim Giladi who wrote, 'Ben-Gurion's Scandals: How the Haganah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews,' documenting these efforts.
For instance, Moroccan Sultan Mohammed V protected his country's Jewish population of over 250k instead of straight up handing them over the Nazi-aligned Vichy regime.
Throughout all these countries, the Arabs & other non-Jews had a tight grip on state power and could have exterminated the Jews anytime they wanted. So, why didn't they? Why did the population of Jews in those countries grow for centuries? Isn't that the argument online Zionists use to defend their genocide in Palestine?
Western normies always lick up the 'they expelled us, so we had to expel the Palestinians,' but, please, don't do it here. It's wrong at best, and outright immoral at worst.
1. The reformation increased literacy/education in the populace to a greater extent in protestant areas, because you no longer needed clergy to talk to God, or understand the bible. Protestant countries have had better education for longer and it has a compounding effect.
2. The "Marriage and Family Program" (the "MFP")... protestant areas discouraged cousin marriage and levirate marriage much earlier than catholic countries, and it is still very common in the rest of the world. Consanguineous marriage is ludicrously prevalent in the middle east, it makes most of the rest of the world more tribal and you end up with compounding genetic defects. By making cousin marriage taboo, it encouraged children to move to a different town and made people less clannish.
The book examines this in multiple different ways, not just at the national level, but even within countries (provinces that are more catholic vs more protestant, and even within Germany, how far the city was from Wittenberg), as well as comparing third world countries that encountered catholic missionaries vs protestant missionaries.
reply