valarauko

"Back in the day" is the key idea here. It's the valuation that doesn't make sense in today's market. What does Cursor offer to be valued at $60 BILLION? Its models are alright but nowhere near SOTA, and pretty much superseded by open source local models at this point.

Flounder might even work, since my initial complaints that the generated designs obscured the wearer's eyesight were met with solutions that just moved the offending eye to the side of the person's head :)

That's lovely. My own personal benchmark has been to ask the various models to generate a functional pair of novelty New Year's Eve glasses on a person, that don't just plonk the year onto the top of regular frames.

I've used their "perfected" xanthan gum which is a separate SKU from their regular xanthan gum. At least for gum arabic they seem to only offer one SKU, so I'm guessing it's not prehydrated.

Is the Modernist Pantry gum arabic pre hydrated?

I've sometimes used baking soda to accelerate softening of beans, and I imagine the effect is more appreciable at higher altitudes perhaps? Some of the usage of baking soda could be innocent enough.

It's largely unfiltered, but it is still treated for disinfection. Chlorination and UV is standard for NYC water, and its fluoridated as well.

Its heavily contested if these were chariots. If anything, I would suggest that the consensus scholarly opinion is that these were ox drawn carts, not chariots.

- no horse remains or equestrian objects have been found, anywhere in India for this time period

- solid wooden wheels (shown in the reconstruction) are too heavy for horses to draw, for which spoked wheels were developed in the Steppe

- the shape of the yoke that would be tied to the animals is straight, the way ox carts have, like Harrapan ox carts. By contrast, yokes for horses are curved, to match the animal's posture.

Fair enough - in which case the Mint just needs to pad the sale price a bit to cover interchange fees, and make a little extra on top, and shipping can be extra. 10% on top of the face value should be more than enough, and would have the side effect of sapping any would be manufactured spend. Yet the prices on the Mint are way above that - it looks like more than 50%. Sure, if the novelty or collector market values it at that premium, great. What I struggle to understand is that this is primarily to combat manufactured spend. I still don't see why manufactured spend is a problem for the Mint to solve, rather than the credit card companies.

That seems ... odd. I can pay my apartment rent with a debit card with a fixed transaction fee (eg, $999.99 and up to $1,999.99 the service fee is $4.95), while covering it with a credit card has a different fee structure of a flat 2.95%. This is with Rent Cafe in NYC, and from what I can tell, it's a very widespread platform across the country. The 2.95% fee specific to credit cards will wipe out the points earned for a credit card under almost all circumstances.

I don't follow. Why would Manufactured Spend specifically cost the Mint money? It's not great for the credit card company, sure, but why the Mint? If the Mint was previously eating the interchange fees & shipping, ok, but that's not a manufactured spend specific issue.

> credit card companies aggressively shut down manufactured spending when they notice it.

I'm familiar with the concept of manufactured spend, and why credit card companies would try to clamp down on it. What I don't get is why the US Mint would care one way or the other for the concerns of credit card companies. The usual way to eliminate manufactured spend would be to add a credit card specific transaction fee that cancels out the spend points. By the Mint increasing the base price for everybody, this affects even people who might be paying with a debit card, or an ACH transaction (not sure if they're options, just positing).

That seems reasonable, but why would the US Mint care about manufactured spend for credit card companies?

There are a couple of ways to rule out modern contamination.

Ancient DNA has certain characteristic damage that changes the sequence slightly, and you can use that to filter out any DNA that doesn't have that signature. Plus, you can maintain DNA profiles of all people involved in handling to ensure it's not modern contamination from the field workers or lab techs.