LOGIC💣

Today, we have 0%. At the beginning of the Biden administration, we had 95%. The policies of that administration really caused us to lose practically the entire China market. - NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang

The article says that both Biden’s and later, Trump’s policies have decreased NVIDIA’s market share. He’s really phrasing it in a favorable way to Trump. Like, the same way, you could say the following, “At the beginning of the Obama administration, we had zero deaths from COVID. Now, we have millions.” Just skip over the part that is inconvenient for propaganda, right?

However, the loss of NVIDIA’s market share in China isn’t only attributed to the previous administration, since under President Trump, Team Green had to halt the sales of its H20 AI chip temporarily, and they were resumed only after the firm agreed on a ‘revenue sharing’ model with the Trump government. More importantly, with US-China trade relations being influenced, NVIDIA also suffered a significant setback from China, as domestic regulators and authorities began persuading Chinese Big Tech companies not to use Team Green’s AI chips.

Also, Jensen Huang’s statement betrays an insane naivete about China. Newsflash: China always tries to take international industry and make a domestic Chinese version. If you have a 95% share of something in China and you’re a foreign company, that simply means it’s related to some fresh technology, or that it’s virtually worthless. If it is believed to have value, China will have their own stuff before you know it, and don’t expect IP laws like patents or copyright to slow them down. They don’t give a shit about that stuff for foreign companies.

This reminds me of how police abuse any new tool they’re given.

Like how while trained dogs can actually sniff out drugs, when they’re given to police, they get retrained to simply alert whenever the police want them to, and essentially become a flimsy reason to let police violate your rights and search anybody they want to.

And the police suffer zero repercussions for their actions. If they don’t find drugs, there’s nobody who’s going to take them to court and force them to retrain their dogs or to disallow drug dogs from being used as reasonable suspicion.

I have to agree.

And actually, the pattern they talk about in the article happens in every generation, anyways. People’s values seem to change as they get older. But I think they don’t really change.

I think if you look into the issue, you’ll find that a lot of people don’t really have political beliefs. They just have selfishness and greed.

When they’re young and poor, it manifests as left leaning because they want the government to give them money, and after they’ve accumulated whatever money they can, it manifests as right leaning because they still want the government to give them money.

The first couple of paragraphs are about the UK, but then it says

Across the Atlantic, the pattern repeats. Average IRA balances for Boomers (ages 60–78) hover around $271,105, compared to just $111,524 for Gen X (ages 44–59).

Looking at the article, they don’t actually say, “in America.” They only say “across the Atlantic.” Seems a bit unclear to me, so I understand how you missed it. But most of the article is about America.

Since you said, “one more movie”, I guess it has to be a movie actor. Otherwise, I’d probably pick an author like Shakespeare, who was also an actor, and obviously, he’d be acting in something new that he wrote. Wouldn’t it be better to end up with a new work?

Otherwise, I’d choose a universally beloved actor who would be willing to make a serious movie that speaks out against what is happening today in America will authority, conviction, and gravitas. Like, Charlie Chaplin starred in The Great Dictator. Maybe he’d be excited to star in a movie that shits all over Trump and MAGA.

My mother has Alzheimer’s and everything important has a tracker in it. Although as the disease progressed, we had to take away most of her important things, like wallet and keys. We still have one on the remote control, though.

I’m sure Randall Munroe knows this better than most, but Einstein’s insight more derailed physics than overturned it. What I mean is that the path it seemed like physics was on at the time was torn out from under the establishment. But it’s not like the work done to that point was discarded.

If she has reception, get her a radio player and program in a bunch of local stations. Talk radio, several stations with different music genres she likes, something with interesting shows like NPR might be nice.

The benefits are that any nurse can operate a radio. It never pauses playback to see if the person responds. It doesn’t require an internet connection or expensive electronics, only a plug and reception.

If she’s not already using her phone, there might be a reason. For example, she may not be allowed electronics, or there might be a lot of petty theft in the facility.

You could argue that cryptography is nothing but a type of obfuscation. I was trying to explain things so that the very average person could understand it.

People don’t stop doing things just because you make it illegal. You even know this because you mentioned India. However people actually do stop when you make it nearly impossible.

Businesses are a separate use case. Phone companies already handle separate use cases, where they use very short memorable numbers for specific purposes. They just need something similar, whether it’s keeping phone numbers, or using something slightly different. Probably some sort of simple alias.

It’s the phone companies that need to innovate, and the solution isn’t very hard.

I intentionally was vague because there are many possible existing ways to accomplish each thing I said, and it is up to the phone company to innovate.

The simplest way to keep people from guessing phone numbers is to make them very long and sparse. If an autodialer had to dial 1000 invalid numbers before finding a valid number, it would make the endeavor that much harder. This is just a convenient example because the cryptography equivalent is harder to explain, but you could make contact info so hard to guess that it would be basically impossible.

Probably the easiest way to explain how to keep people from passing contact info is to imagine a two step process like facebook has. If I pass your facebook username to someone else, they don’t automatically become your friend. The cryptographic equivalent would involve a chain of trust, but again, harder to explain.

It’s really the phone companies’ fault for stagnating instead of innovating.

There is no reason at this point for most people to have phone numbers at all. We have the technology today to throw the whole concept out the window.

Replace it with something where a stranger couldn’t guess how to contact a random person. Replace it with something where third parties can’t easily share your contact info.

You could even have both technologies at the same time to help transition. And we do, as users, but we still need phone numbers because our carriers don’t give us multiple options directly.

Phone numbers are based on requirements for a system that’s almost 150 years old now. Back when the numbers really meant locations and before people realized how easy it could be exploited to steal old people’s retirement money.

I’m not sure why anyone would leave pizza out instead of in the fridge.

Cold pizza is one of my favorite foods. Apparently, cold temperatures can cause certain flavors to intensify. Whatever the reason, it always tastes better the next morning.

All I’m saying is that OP didn’t make a very good link to demonstrate their TIL. The thing they linked isn’t the thing that was invented before matches, and the page also doesn’t even say when matches were invented.

From your link:

Döbereiner’s lamp, also called a “tinderbox” (“Feuerzeug”), is a lighter invented in 1823 by the German chemist Johann Wolfgang Döbereiner.

From the “match” article:

The first modern, self-igniting match was invented in 1805 by Jean Chancel, assistant to Professor Louis Jacques Thénard of Paris.

It’s sometimes called red fascism.

Obviously, being asked to perform a paternity test is an implication of low character.

However, I suspect that in the near future, DNA tests will be done as a matter of course to test the baby for genetic diseases, and as a result, the paternity will also be known from the same test.

It seems a little dystopian, but we are already in that dystopia, and people simply don’t know it. That’s because of familial DNA testing. Even if you never get your DNA tested, as long as some of your descendants get tested, the paternity will be known. Everybody should already assume that children of affairs being born today will be exposed during the mother’s lifetime.

So, the good thing about this dystopia is that there will be some point where specific paternity tests will not be a thing, and all of these type of accusations of low character will go away. Small comfort for somebody who is going through this right now, though.

In this case, the primary meaning of “swag” is “promotional goods or items”. It is promoting the Science Club, and he got it from his school’s science club. The shirt is Science Club swag. The second meaning of “swag” is not needed to make the shirt make sense.

no plan for federation, and no guardrails to stop the slow slide into bloat

What would be an example of a guardrail to stop the slow slide into bloat?

I’m not asking for a detailed explanation, but I simply can’t understand what sort of feature you’re imagining.

I sort of get the idea that maybe you just mean that you’re already seeing the beginnings of bloat, but if there was something that could actually stop bloat, that sounds very interesting.

“FREEDOM!!!”