MichaelZuo

This seems fairly obvious, clearly vast amounts of possible wrongdoing, once exposed, could genuinely damage reputation abroad to some degree.

So how did such a law ever survive scrutiny?

It seems like a blanket ban on exposure of nearly all possible wrongdoing.

Well yes, that’s what makes it extremeley extremely sophisticated?

If it’s thought of as extremely extremely sophisticated auto-complete, then that wouldn’t be surprising at all.

Wait so then how are they signing big customers still who would definitely lose a lot if us-east-1 went down?

(who would be motivated to check if anything is restricted to only us-east-1)

No.

Flat out removing a functionality that is 100% certain to be critical to many without any way of regaining it via any combination of features found on the iPad…

And without any notice whatsoever, and with no way to downgrade back, gets pretty close to flat out evil.

Don’t try to talk out of both sides of your mouth.

Even if they clownishly made it more buried and difficult to find under a dozen submenus… it would still be much less bad in comparison.

(If they never advertised or implied the iPad as being suitable for presentations, education, etc., then that have lessened the severity, but clearly that’s not the case)

Even though it’s one step removed from literal sabotage, there’s no angle I can see that would render it just a “minor thing”.

It effectively makes it useless for anyone where not showing the presenter’s screen content was critically important.

Unless you know of some alternative method?

Let’s not beat around the bush. Whoever made this decision in Apple seems pretty close to flat out evil.

There must be at least tens of thousands of ipad users globally (on ipads capable of upgrading to 27) who would would find this a critical loss.

To not mention this at all, not even in fine print release notes, while pushing people to upgrade knowing they cant ever downgrade back in the future, is just sabotage one step removed.

Especially as they did not offer any alternative way to access the functionality.

Huh? From what I heard, no combination of groups in the beltway bothered to expend the political capital to actually force through across the board cuts. Not even a meagre 5% cut per annum from the total budget.

They all backed out when it came to walk the talk.

(Or to cut $1 billion here and there, hundreds of times per annum, which would have needed like a dozen DOGEs and iron discipline in Congress)

Are you confused? I never claimed to own an orange cat.

Yeah the lack of an app store is fine for the first year.

But the requirement for everyone to have an ipad or iphone on 27.2 or later (for full functionality) seems more of a showstopper. I would have been in the market for one but haven’t even bothered to upgrade past iOS 18 yet.

“ Arhgap36 is known to cause developmental problems in other animals when it is over- or under-functioning. But it seems that in orange cats, the gene is overexpressed only in developing and mature pigment cells called melanocytes.”

This doesn’t make sense… if thousands of anecdotal reports in cats specifically report otherwise? And if it’s known to not be limited to melanocytes in other mammalian species?

This must be a joke, clearly pelican drawing in svg would be in its training data after multiple years of it hitting HN front page.

Are you confused?

A formal proof with 1 contradiction and 9999 correct steps is just as false as a formal proof with 10 contradictions and 9990 correct steps.

There is no “less wrong” or “more wrong” in logic, by definition.

i.e. There is no safe lower bound threshold of “wrongness” that can partially salvage the correct steps. Or conversely, 1 contradiction is already sufficient to prove anything at all.

Even if it’s 99% coherent, and only 1% incoherent… then the end result is still incoherent?

e.g. 1 contradiction in a formal proof is sufficient to negate 9999 logically valid steps.

There’s no magical way for it to automatically become coherent.

Since there can be no universal arbiter on “value”… the whole concept of “CEV” is nonsensical to begin with (unless we assume literally unlimited time/resources/etc.).

It’s a big pretend game.