uselesswords

The problem is what happens if an incompetent person stays on forever. There are many examples in history of great countries and empires that were lead by one person only for it all to come down when one idiot became the person in charge. An important idea behind term limits and democracy is sacrificing the ability to have an amazing leader for life so that an incompetent leader doesn't serve for life.

Its a fundamental safeguard and a hedge against tyranny. Its why, in general, countries that are lead by one person for life can be very impressive in the short term but inevitably fall apart once the wrong person eventually takes charge. Because the odds are that eventually the wrong person will take charge.

Ok I'll bite, name one vendor that has built flawless secure software of any comparable scale

The computational theory of mind is the leading theory for pure cognition. There is no leading theory of consciousness, although some people also favor the computational theory of mind for that as well but this is far less popular.

At best trying to scale this understanding from what you have stated might (gratuitously) get you to a multi-layer percepetron. Add a few ideas and you would hit a convolutional neural net which represented the frontier a decade ago. However this is still so far divorced from the modern frontier of AI, transformers, because the leaps are more focused on attention mechanisms than anything else. And even just understanding a transformer is merely a building block.

This is basically understanding a building block (A) of a building block (B) of a building block (C) that builds D and purporting that you can understand D from the building blocks of A. The equivalent is saying that knowing Newton's laws is enough to understand how we get to the moon. It might be fine for a hand-wavy idea, but its just not enough.

Can someone explain the waste water thing to me, because unless they’re separating it into H2 and O2 how is it possible for water to be wasted?

Its the inevitable result when you allow politics to enter a forum. It used to be posts that were overtly political were considered off-topic, but that has become more normalized. Hell ignoring this post, the top story right now is "American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis" which is just another political post masquerading. I wish we would just ban politics or maybe find a middle-ground like allowing overtly political posts one day a week. It's probably too late to save HN though, the community has already normalized these posts.

Yes exactly, if the exporter is not absorbing the cost, and the consumer is not absorbing the cost (for the most part), the importing company must be absorbing the bulk of the cost.

You are getting downvoted quite heavily but I do wonder what percentage of people are growing more and more accustomed to the latter.

I say this someone who was dedicated to (neo)vim for a decade. With AI I spend a lot less time writing/editing pure code these days, and all the VSCode based IDEs have become so essential to my workflow/productivity that using vim only would be masochistic. I still enable the vim binds in my editor and while they’re never a perfect 100% replacement I get so much value out of other tools I can’t see myself going back.

How can it be possible that consumers are paying 96% of tariffs that range from 25-100%. Yet inflation has only risen by 0.5 points? Consumption would have to be less than a fifth of what it was a year ago. And why haven’t there been such equally drastic price changes on shelves if whats functionally the entire cost is being passed to consumer?

I agree with everything you said, but the news organization's decision to include or not include a quote or speculation from someone is fundamentally a narrative choice. And every news organization makes those choices at their own discretion and it can result in uncritical reporting.

Pick a few frontpage stories from any news site you like, then see how its covered one a new source you don't like/leans the opposite way politically (short of the crazy outlets) and see how the same stories are reported. You'll see different quotes, different speculation, different choices of what to include or not include. Hell even the choice of what is covered on the frontpage will obviously vary if you just compare them. Saying that what a news outlet is reporting is "not the opinion of the news organization itself" may be technically correct in a legal sense, but that's worst kind of correct.

> most responsible outlets don’t speculate on motives until there’s some evidence of a connection

That is simply not true, every single news outlet without fail speculates, uncritically quotes a speculator, or leaves out warranted critical speculation at their own discretion. Pick a news site that you think doesn’t do this and I will happily find an example from their front page.

Technical point here but opinions are not illegal to have.

Besides that your point is missing the fact that you are dealing with outside services that provide a contract for their usage (GPS, GSM). You should be free to program your own devices but if you use an external service, then yes they can specify how you use their service. Those are contractual obligations. Cars on the road have clear safety risks and those are legal obligations. None of those obligations should govern what you do with your device until your device interacts with other people and/or services.