Could have been worse:
https://lemmy.world/post/24169630

Most of them are leaving. I think the ones remaining rely on bundling with other insurance or services.

For perishable items, you’d get a bathtub curve. For humans in particular one more precise estimate is the Gompertz–Makeham law of mortality.

My biggest frustration with OneDrive is in combination with Office (on my work PC). You browse to a local folder and save, but instead of saving it locally and syncing to the cloud, it saves to the cloud and downloads, and it is slow.

A progressive individual tax would be far more complicated, as you would have to assign, track and audit individual use. And that doesn’t even get into secondary uses (e.g. manufacture and transport of goods).

The flat rebate makes the tax progressive. Typical people pay $0 net tax, or even come out ahead, while heavy polluters pay almost the full tax. Just raising the tax will effectively make it progressive.

Seems to mostly be called “Screaming Seagull” or “Inhaling Seagull”

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/inhaling-seagull

Paper is paywalled, but from the SciTech article it looks like mostly it was sodium sulfate. They did also make some “ocean-degradable plastics”.

Thanks for the link and breakdown.

It sounds like a better description of the estimated thinking speed would be 5-50 bits per second. And when summarizing capacity/capability, one generally uses a number near the top end. It makes far more sense to say we are capable of 50 bps but often use less, than to say we are only capable of 10 but sometimes do more than we are capable of doing. And the paper leans hard into 10 bps being a internally imposed limit rather than conditional, going as far as saying a neural-computer interface would be limited to this rate.

“Thinking speed” is also a poor description for input/output measurement, akin to calling a monitor’s bitrate the computer’s FLOPS.

Visual processing is multi-faceted. I definitely don’t think all of vision can be reduced to 50bps, but maybe the serial part after the parallel bits have done stuff like detecting lines, arcs, textures, areas of contrast, etc.

It does look like they don’t currently have any funding issues. They have 1.5 years of reserves and give about 15% of their income out in grants to other organizations. And like most web sites, the actual hosting costs are a relatively small part of their operation.

leaves no calling cards

I think the engravings on the bullets were intended as a message. It seemed like he expected to be caught with his “manifesto” as well. Not saying that’s sufficient to call it terrorism, but it does show a bit of intent beyond anger/revenge.

Haven’t played, but I found this (negative) review compelling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF-Kd2BBpx8

He did play through the whole game.

Please don’t use folk’s medical condition as an insult.

First time I’ve seen someone mention Luck be a Landlord. Really fun game.

Ah. They would never do anything good because they’re evil, and they’re evil because they would never do anything good. Logic so airtight not even the tiniest fact can penetrate.

2,300 different charities according to her website. You can see the whole list here: https://yieldgiving.com/gifts/

Well MacKenzie Scott has given away $17 billion of her ~$60 billion over 5 years, so she’s not terrible.

Unfortunately that pretty much depends on building more housing, which takes time and Congress.

Actual title of the research paper is Elective co-parenting with someone already known versus someone met online: implications for parent and child psychological functioning.

It compares a small sample of two different co-parenting situations, and while it does conclude they are both within “normal range”, it certainly doesn’t make or justify the claim in the headline, which doesn’t even mention co-parenting.

In August, the Department of Justice filed an antitrust suit against the company, alleging its pricing algorithm allows landlords to collectively push rents higher.

In August, the Department of Justice filed an antitrust suit against the company, alleging its pricing algorithm allows landlords to collectively push rents higher.