maerF0x0

isn't that their freedom to? And the right/freedom of those who democratically created the low regulation environment?

I do not understand this idea that someone from one place should have their preferences taking precedence the preferences, rights and freedoms of folks who actually live in another place.

The main caveat being the boundary lines, but i think that's very much an edge case.

That is an invested capital issue. If it's not worth building a plant, they wont. The supply will fall until the prices rise enough to incentivize new plants. If the elec prices rise enough the datacenters will find alternate solutions .

It seems like people are some how railing against basic economics?

Like if we dont like it we have a marketplace of alternatives, the opportunity to invest in new supply, and the choice to not consume said energy if the price is too high...

That is all covered by my point about regulations rising to the task. Did you read the whole comment?

The point is you should be allowed to have a gas turbine (or whatever generator meets the requirements), if it meets emissions, noise, and heat regulations.

I agree that Citizens United needs to go, let's prioritize our efforts to solve root issues instead of tire ourselves trimming weeds that pop up.

the US is a republic of states. By design it wastes time and money to allow disagreement, variety, and self-determination of states.

they'll just build it somewhere else

Why should we have rights to say they cannot do it somewhere else? It's not a moral issue, it's a tragedy of commons issue or unpriced externality issue.

I hear and understand those, but why isn't it a regulation or requirements issue?

Ambient noise must be contained, excess heat must be mitigated, free hot water must be provided to nearby buildings. etc. Also this is a city's opportunity to do something like assess penalty tax points. (ie, datacenter usage tax, just like we do to hotels)

IMO NIMB should be illegal, so long as the builder meets standards. Maybe those standards should rise to include ambient noise requirements, heat dissipation, capital contributions to water/electricity supply, additional tax burden points (for land use without, maybe?).

But I also feel there needs to be an assertion that if you own the land it's your property and you're free to do most things with it, safely and politely. This is about property rights and freedoms.

It blows my mind that these two companies are going to mint billionaires, meanwhile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz was bullied to death by the state for sharing academic papers which were at least in part, if not largely, paid for by tax dollars.

If it wasn't so controlled it'd might as well have just been reddit.

I agree there's a balance, and maybe they edged over the line, but I was consistently happy to have the following be the outcomes

1. Answers were reasonably close to correct, usable, informative (teaching)

2. Your site score came to mean something -- I once had a hiring CTO say "Oh you have some popular answers on the techs we use"

3. Progressive unlocks helped guide the path of participation -- it was clear what to start with, and what to do next as you were taught their culture and ways. It's not very popular to say in 2026, but not every culture is good and it's important to curate culture and teach newcomers the culture of the space.

I definitely read that as weird ai and was confused when I saw a normal, but dope, video

Unsure if it's just the way they prompted it / coded it, but the output is far too much a literal direct copy of the lyrics. The best music videos have a story arc on the theme of but often not litearlly the lyrics, and start with obscurity and reveal something (following all the literary/story mechanisms)

Consider Amber Run - Found lyrics versus the video, and the story arc of the video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yj6V_a1-EUA

I believe the parent was referring to the power to do something with the money. (Not in what one owes). In a decent society there are things no amount of money can buy, and things that take inordinate amounts that would only corrupt a sick fraction of the populace. That is part of what is gross about Epstein's scale, it made many of us realize that there is a price on those specific things and it wasn't just a sociopathic microslice of society, but seemingly "all" (lots, most, too many -- choose your term) of the people in power.

Additionally Lobbying shows us the amount of money for corruption is surprisingly low.

or lease? or... There's probably a dozen words to mean that same word.

A consumer friendly policy could be:

1. Proration for a "lifetime" access (87 years) denied. In many cases probably close to 90% refunded.

2. irrespective, a Full refund for those who had never viewed the purchase.

3. A refund equal to the purchase price on the streaming platform newly acquired. Or a lifetime access (87 years) of the monthly billed streaming platform.

For one quarter to half the price he could have had a motorcycle which is faster than nearly everything on the road.

just as fast once you factor in the time it takes to review and correct the LLM

Do you have a source for that claim?

you do it on your own terms, rather than on the terms of the employer

You've setup a condition where essentially every answer is true. I know someone who spins wool and dyes it and makes socks. Does it still make sense? Only once you add in the fact she enjoys.

If you're real question is what can be done better by hand in July 2026?

afaik optimization problems are still getting superior results from humans. Things like if you do this algo you can loop the array once instead of 3x. If you align this struct like this it's faster on a certain arch + os. Or if we do these 2 steps in microservice A we can only touch the memory and network once instead of twice etc.

a 2x speed up is still meaningful at scale. (I'd bet there are 100s of software companies out there that would pay 7 to 8 figures if you could 1/2 their AWS bill)

There's a coming reckoning with how little effort actually matters in the grand scheme of things. If your job takes you 10 seconds or 10 minutes or 10 hours, you havent done a "better job". If someone sits and thinks for an hour about a subject or an AI gives the answer in <10 seconds it doesn't imply one outcome is better than the other.

At the end of the day your toil is roughly meaningless to those around you, they only truly care about the outcomes -- both material and emotional -- for themselves. What do I get and how did you make me feel seems to be the only currency between humans, maybe it wasn't always this way but it sure seems to be near universal now.

Edit: also the how this was made was really quite clever :)

we don't have to wait for one. But anti-corruption practices like watch dogs / transparency et al are the next steps before jumping to conclusions.

Like IMO the real recourse is to come down hard on the abuses of power, and that includes things like getting Citizens united taken down so that police union(s) are not so powerful etc.

I'm generally more interested in root causes than pruning the leaves. Which I realize often is not the "pragmatic" choice.

I think you're really underestimating the public's desire to punish criminals.

Yes, i understand what you're saying hence why i mentioned culture. American justice (and cultural cues that inform the policies) seems to be more about revenge than rehabilitation.

AFAIK there is no right to privacy in public, no?

What I don't care so much about the data collection as I do about how it's used.

Its not that the NSA surveils that bugs me. It's that they use kangaroo courts, "asdfasdfasdf" as the search reason field, that they cyber stalk girlfriends, or view camera devices to see people in state of undress (illegally and unethically).

In this case we have an example of police using the devices, for a very legitimate usecase, more or less in an excellent manner (save for not properly securing the footage).

nah, that's not at all what I'm saying. What I'm saying is IMO until the police have something to hide (besides their crappy securing of the usage) It's not really a news piece.

If we had a story of a Police officer using the drone to follow his dominos order, or his ex-girlfriend -- thatd be a story about abuse of power and quite newsworthy.

So we'd rather a high speed chase, crashes, danger to cyclists and pedestrians? I'd rather a drone follows the car until it stops and the police arrive to retrieve it and give a hand slap to the offender.

I know this is lagging, and American culture will take decades to accept it, but the better our police are the lighter the sentences can be. Part of why a big hard sentence was seen as a deterrent was sort of the EROI ... If the chances of catching are small, you need a big deterrent. If the chances of catching are near 100% you only need a smaller deterrent (and apply it close to the behavior to maximize the brain training of "Do bad, bad things happen")

Exposes reality of urban surveillance

Sounds like they're saying we should be appalled by this usage of drones... IDK, until we have some proof of an truly innocent (found by a court) or no reason to be suspected person (eg profiled, misidentified) having a bad outcome (such as arrest and long detention) without recourse (sue the crap out of the city, dept, or state) ...

This article basically reads as "Drones help police apprehend a man involved with auto theft" ...

The only "news" here (no shocker) is that the PD is somewhat ignorant on how to handle these new technologies securely. They need to go out on the open market and hire some of the best and brightest security folks displaced by Mythos (that's a joke), and secure their stuff with the basics.

You're assuming economics is the ultimate goal and not just a tool in service of a greater goal.

should test? As in test the blood? Or test the hypothesis?

if the latter I'm not sure it's enough of a stretch to say unprotected, hi-risk, promiscuity is a risk factor for blood borne illness like HIV? (Such that we need to research it separately)

here's more irrational. Because they have >1M single men who will never have a bride. Maybe they want to come and take.

Maybe Xi decides they're mad that we're defending Taiwain.

Maybe the decide to do the inverse vietnam and that the American left deserves to be freed from "Trump" and that communism is freedom and virtuous to give to the American people.

Like I said, probably not rational.

Personally? China. Is it rational, IDK. It's just the largest more capable power at this moment. (particularly their industrial base and ability to out produce weapons / soldiers)

This is so much more fun than those dumb word games on linkedin

Ok, all the negatives aside, focused on silver linings. I am musing how it's good that the US is finding this out now, and not in a really big conflict on it's own home territory in which it cannot get out of (ie an invasion).

Yes, the world seeing her weakness could increase the chances of someone trying (or wanting to). But I think this will help spur on a defense startup and spending spree.