Calvin02

I (personally) think this is the wrong kind of solution.

I think a better solution would to mandate that platforms offer a ranked feed and a chronological feed and make the setting sticky for users.

I think giving users the agency over how much they consume is good but mandating a “UX” pattern feels too specific.

Not to diminish his accomplishment, he attached the game boy camera to a 60inch telescope at Mount Wilson. This is a cool project but the quality of the photo is what you’d expect from a gameboy camera.

The headline seems to imply that he custom built a telescope for his gameboy.

100%

I wonder if the cost benefit analysis would show that this is still the best policy - I.e. are more people dying because of overdose of acetaminophen than would have from “behind the counter” + controlled acquisition of codeine products.

I would also imagine that the compliance / nationwide tracking is now much easier than when the legislation was initially conceived.

I found this to be an issue on YouTube. It wasn’t necessarily malicious. I often put on a no-talking video in the background while reading and the ad interruptions became really loud. I eventually just ended up subscribing, but this is great to see.

At some point you realize that your smallest customers generate the least value but require the most support.

Shedding low value users to others makes you stronger and them weaker.

Well intentioned but hard to do.

I’d posit that even if you somehow do this in a neutral way, consumer adoption will fall in three buckets: (1) largely supportive, (2) largely unsupportive, (3) ambivalent/silent majority.

People who are largely supportive are already seeking out additional data points in their news consumption. Similarly, people who are largely unsupportive will gravitate towards their chosen echo chamber. The silent majority will remain largely ambivalent and, if they vote, will remain single issue voters.

The risk is that the government doesn’t find an effective neutral way for deciding what’s included and what’s not.

This doesn’t feel like something Apple would approve of. Are you concerned about them shutting this down?

This doesn't surprise me.

I grew up reading NYTimes on the weekend with my parents. I held them in extreme high regard when it came to their news and journalistic integrity. Over the years, I've shifted to think of them as another data point. For the industries that I'm most familiar with (Tech, Finance, and Pharma), I find their reporting often shallow, lacking in nuance, or intentional/unintentional misreporting. And I often wonder if their reporting of other areas is similarly lacking.

Now, they are just another data point, which is sad.

Wasn't it Apple that was trying to get Meta to implement age verification in the first place? So, Meta is trying to get them to do it, which seems right.

Why does Apple always get a free pass?

Threats exist in both trusted and untrusted environments though.

This feels like a really niche use case for SSH. Exposing this more broadly could lead to set-it-and-forget-it scenarios and ultimately make someone less secure.

My man, this is the Raspberry Pi guy, Jeff Greeling. He lives in St. Louis, MO.

What part of the quote below suggests encouragement of violence? Seems like one person’s pov about what Kirk espoused.

In one screenshot shared by the agency, a person identified as an Argentine national said Kirk “devoted his entire life spreading racist, xenophobic, misogynistic rhetoric.”

Could you share some examples of when democrats have denied visas?

“Party of free speech” (tm)

Pacemakers? MRI machines? Kidney Dialysis?

Have you ever tried to return something bought at a clothing store? I made that mistake once in France.

You’re creating an absurd standard “repeatedly return large expensive items” but even every day things are way easier in the US.

Thank you for sharing.

I have long suspected that the sequencing data isn't valuable except to law enforcement.

If it were as easy to link sequencing to diseases, we would have seen a rapid advances in our ability to address those diseases. The genetic data alone isn't enough of a predictor.

TikTok feels pretty clear. China doesn't allow any western internet platforms to operate in the country. Why should the world allow a Chinese social media platform?

This feels like a pretty non-partisan issue.

I’m so over PIs. I’ve replaced it with N100s and can’t say enough good thing about them. After the gouging and the supply problems, the cost was probably $10 more per project but in return, I get a more reliable and performant system.

Doesn’t Threads and Fediverse indicate that they are headed that way for social as well?

Does it have to be or does it just have to be enough to be a deterrent to China?

I wonder if the strategy behind the CHIPS act is to have enough “backup” capacity in the US that it isn’t completely vulnerable.

Banks are required to maintain financial transaction records.

Is the argument that governments don't have a good reason to mandate record collection?

Why can't I ask my government to keep me safe from terrorists but also expect that companies will not just be careless with the data they collect as part of that?

How many problems in the US are due at least in part to the desire to support and promote democracy?

We wouldn’t be involved / concerned with NATO unless we valued democracy and freedom for our partners, no?

This is a pretty weak case.

If the FTC considered this material information, they should have asked to review it back then. If they requested it but Meta didn’t provide it, then it is an issue.

However, if the FTC didn’t consider it important at the time of the merger, it can’t go back and argue that something is valuable because the acquisitions turned out to be more valuable.

For example, if India and Brazil decide that WhatsApp needs to be able to see messages and break e2e, WA instantly becomes less valuable.

Or Snapchat could have eaten IG’s lunch.

Would FTC still have made the same argument?

Why not build a broad coalition and get other countries to mediate on behalf of Israel?

If that were the case, you wouldn’t see 10-14 year old see a 500% increase and the increase would be closely correlated with when they got the phone, etc.

Also, the article seems to suggest that the absolute incident rate isn’t high - which could mean that we are likely getting better at detection rather than increase in underlying prevalence.

That seems odd. What would be the basis of such a lawsuit?

I just asked “What was the last question that you were asked?”

Co-pilot: The last question I was asked was about the height of Mount Everest in terms of bananas.

Looks like a canned response.

I guess one way to get data on that would be to ask people “Outside of tech and Buffet crew, how many billionaires can you name?”

When he says stuff like this he just means he's excited about it.

That's an overly charitable interpretation of what he's doing.

The pattern that I've observed is: 1) he's a narcissist who always wants to be in the news and/or 2) he's trying to distract from something.

He can't stand it when the press moves on from him. His MO is to wait for a week or two and then throw out something outlandish to suck up the media oxygen.

He and Trump are very similar people.