> a) "just legislate that being racist/sexist to people is illegal, then have judges interpret" (which is what seems to be simply necessary to actually make progress against the endlessly inventive evil of racism/sexism),
The current rules are that [in specific listed contexts] you are not allowed to treat individuals differently on the basis of [explicit list of characteristics].
That's essentially your (a), except it's not up to interpretation. Pretending that it is up to interpretation is how you get things like what the article is about (in that case by measuring group statistics rather than comparing individual experiences).
If you're buying a $700k house there are only a few parts of the country where your statement is true, and frankly much of that comes down to a few cities and metro areas. The idea that people buying a house in rural NC today and 30 years ago are somehow facing radically different (inflation adjusted) lot prices doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
But again, if you want to look at houses in the 1970's then you have to remember that the US population has risen by 150,000,000 since then... the land is the same size. The cities that everyone wants to live and work in are mostly the same with some changes in the Pacific coast of course. You're also competing with far more people who have relatively more money to spend, including a willingness to go into serious debt, to live their "dream".
I'd be interesting to dive into bounds and good properties for sets of landmarks.
I imagine that if,
- Every node is at least X cost/distance away from a landmark
- Landmarks are no closer than Y cost/distance from each other
You can start promising a lot about the size of your open set on any execution.
A* on h* (perfect heuristic) takes O(l) where l is the length of the solution (could expand exactly l nodes, but solving/guessing ties incorrectly might bump this to a multiple around the avg edges per vertex).
I imagine that having good bounds mean you'll take no longer than a certain amount of expansions/depth before you lock-into the railway that h* provides (and you need some extra work to get off it too).
I really did not expect the ball to keep moving in Arkanoid when I started dragging cards around in Solitaire. That would have made an audience back in the day stand up and scream.
Just because this title did the best doesn't make it not misleading. If you are a serious reviewer, it wouldn't have been an option in the first place.
You can make an even more outlandish title and get even more views. Doesn't make it right.
My understanding is: your proposal is not very different from what Shopify is doing except they are tracking 'reserved units' (one per row) and you are proposing tracking 'orders' as the temporary state to then reconcile back with inventory quantities.
>Because the education is so poor, the only remediation is to hire unqualified people. So you end up with a deficient civil service in the name of fairness.
I think there's more solutions to that, no? The poor school might make more poor students, but statistically it probably also has some good ones too. So maybe given a basket of roughly equal candidates to a position, one can treat those with a diverse background as having a benefit, rather than looking at their school background and assuming they're unqualified or setting them aside.
If your candidates don't meet the bar then fine, but i'm not convinced that's the default case in life.
I've used a number of mini PCs and Arm SBCs with 8 GB of RAM. Most casual use (browsing, writing, media playback) is no problem, but using "creative" software (image editors, NLEs, DAWs, etc.) quickly gets annoying.
And you think YouTube represents the average user of q-tips?
Even when YouTube has videos uploaded by doctors having to put up with this kind of stupidity, it doesn't change the fact that hardly anyone does that. The vast majority of stuff uploaded to YouTube isn't even that. It's losers trying to get views.
I always wonder how reporters get folks who have these tangential connections to powerful / terrible people to talk after they refuse. It's an impressive skill.
The social model of diability is great in some ways (encouraging activism), but the idea that everything needs to be changed to be "designed for" people with disabilities has its downsides. Not all disabilities can be overcome, but to the extent that some can (at least partly), often IMO it's a good thing to have an expectation that most people can deal with the real world.
Carbon capture gets downvotes because it’s not working anywhere at scale. The fossil fuel industry loves it because it’s saying they get paid now and maybe someone else gets paid later, and their industry doesn’t have profits cut, but anyone planning to continue living on earth would prefer we stop polluting now because that is proven to actually work at scale.
They were really so proud of that AI image that they just had to tack it on at the end? Did nothing but make the blog post feel like cheap mass produced slop
This is my situation exactly. Got an i5-4570 with 16GB, no GPU, running Unraid with a bunch of containers for Jellyfin, qBittorrent, Crafty Controller (minecraft), HomeAssistant, etc.
I'm using a PCIe expansion card to get double NVMe drives for the cache disk, and then three (up to five) 3.5" spinning 8TB drives for long term.
I tried really hard to get it on 32GB but sadly the motherboard only has two slots and only supports 8GB DDR3 modules. I literally ordered some of the rare late-generation 16GB ones and it refused to boot, with no firmware updates available from the vendor (Advantech, board is an AIMB-274).
> sense of purpose and meaning that you put so much time, blood, sweat and tears
But is that what you really feel? It seems like a repackaged cliché.
I read your text a couple of times, and I still don't understand what makes you feel unmotivated to work on software. The reasons you state seem disconnected from the actual outcome of the whole thing.
Perhaps there is a deeper, more stealthy motivation you are actually concealing (maybe even from yourself). Like getting recognition, status or something else? That would explain why you wouldn't engage with it anymore (since the bar for those is significantly higher now that "anyone can do it"). Don't take it the wrong way, it's a genuine question and I'm not implying those are somehow shallower objectives.
Mostly this. The phrase "code was the never the hard part" touches on a larger culture war. I was I was moving up in the ranksit was common to see people, both myself and then watching others, say things like "I just want to code".
Coding was the job. But there were diminishing returns in that getting better at coding wasn't as impactful as getting better at all the social skills, big picture strategy, and general scheming.
Maybe "code was never the hard part" should be replaced with "coding wasn't the most important part". But I think we all know what it means. Those higher level skills are the things that LLMs can't do, at least for now. Coding? It can do that, at least sort of.
> News just in: talking about your mental health, especially for men, does not improve your mental health.
> For the majority of men, most of the time.