CarbonIceDragon @ CarbonIceDragon @pawb.social

Posts

2

Comments

1,302

Joined

2 yr. ago

The Henry Ford of our time (except for Elon not having the mechanical skills I guess). Musk probably would take that as a compliment, but I mean it as an insult

Wait, is it really just nectar with less water content then? Could we make honey ourselves without all the bees by just collecting a bunch of nectar and evaporating off some of the water?

Not all games need to be games you personally like, why shouldn't people who like realistic games have them?

hypothetically, I suppose it could alternately be done by instances just federating the number of votes from their instance and only storing who voted what internally. Though then you might get issues with very easy vote manipulation if a server just says a lot of people voted a certain way without needing to make accounts to "justify" the fake votes.

Have any of those wars come close to actually threatening the state of Israel itself, rather than just their control over territories they'd occupied from someone else? In any case, you're also making a false assumption that ending US military aid to Israel leaves it conventionally defenseless, or that US weapons have to be stopped from going there in perpetuity. Israel has both a domestic arms industry and other countries it could acquire weapons from, it would just be at increased difficulty and expense. Further, when the objection to sending US arms there is that they are using them to commit genocide, that objection would naturally end should Israel cease those operations.

The point is not "Israel should have nothing left but the nukes, because they can just use those", but rather "Israel's nukes mean that a full scale invasion of the country is not likely, so we have room to revoke our current military assistance in order to pressure them to behave better, without much risk of destroying them in the meantime by doing so."

I'm not suggesting they actually use those nukes. I'm suggesting that Iran or such will not actually launch an attack strong enough to credibly threaten to destroy Isreal, because it would be suicide to do so. The use of having nuclear weapons is that if you have them, it never makes sense to push you into condition where you feel you have to use them. Using them offensively in Gaza or the like would not be in Isreals interest for a number of reasons.

If someone's suggestion sounds so obviously flawed that you feel the need to say that, perhaps you should take a moment and consider if they're really implying what you think they are.

From what I understand, they're trying to (mis)use a law to the effect that companies cant all get together and boycott a competitor in order to try to drive it out of the market. If my understanding is correct then, for example, if say Ford and GM and such happened to also run electric taxi businesses, and those taxi businesses bought cars off the open market where in theory they should buy whatever they think gives them what they need at the best price, even if from another car maker, then it wouldnt be legal for them to all go and say "we make electric cars, and Tesla does too, so lets not buy anything from Tesla, regardless of how cheap or good their products are, so they lose business" (Assuming that the Teslas in question would in fact be perfectly suitable for said taxi companies needs that is). They're trying to sue an advertising industry group, claiming that they've done this kind of thing. Except the members of the group in question arent really competitors to Twitter, and in any case, the quality of advertising is thought to diminish if the ads are next to objectionable and bigoted content, since its thought to hurt the advertised company's image, so if my understanding is correct, it should be simple enough for them to argue "We're not colluding to hurt your company, your product just isnt up to our standards so we arent buying it"

Could one argue that since Israel pretty clearly possesses nuclear weapons even if they wont directly admit to it, that they should be able to deter attacks that actually stand a chance at threatening the existence of the country due to the threat of those weapons, and therefore already have the required advantage without additional US assistance?

I dont know about LLMs specifically, but its happened with other AI tech. Like those amazon grocery stores where they wanted to make an AI that just sees what items you take and bills you for them without you having to go through a checkout line, but ended up having to cancel the idea after the AI didnt actually work the vast majority of the time and they just had hired a bunch of people in India to look at camera footage and identify what people had bought instead for those purchases. I would not be surprised if some AI startup or another wasnt just exploiting the desperation of people on MTurk or whatever to get something done and just pretending to have groundbreaking AI tech doing it to fool investors.

Fair. It does seem a bit inefficient to make the crust and then not eat it though

Empty carbs in moderation are fine, it's not like they're poisonous or anything.

I mean, they have nukes, actually invading them with intent to actually conquer them or permanently take significant parts of the country would be a risky move regardless of how depleted their stocks get.

To be fair, the song isnt about tricking the devil and using one's wits to overcome terrible odds or such like that, this random guy is just that good that he can just enter into a contest with a supernatural power and win it honestly. Id bet stories like that exist in other cultures, surely, but still probably arent as common as ones where the human must resort to tricks or suffers for hubris. Then again, the song also suggests the devil hasnt been too successful lately, so maybe this version of the character just isnt terribly powerful in the first place.

This makes me wonder: if you give them nicer soil than they evolved in, can they still use those nutrients instead, or do they require insects to survive now?

Under a few specific circumstances comments can make sense, like if it's a community for drawn stuff of one variety or another, that's used by newer artists looking for constructive feedback.

Default search engine on their browser?

This is just the modern version of those boomer comics where the punchline is a guy not liking his wife

That I'm not sure about, I know a lot less about skinks than I do geckos, but some quick searching suggests that at least some skinks can regrow a dropped tail

Pretty much yeah. Heres an example from leopard geckos:

The top is one with the original tail, and the lower is one with a regrown tail

(Neither of these are my pictures, I just googled some for an example)

In this case at least (I'm unsure if every species is like this), the regrow tail doesn't really regrow the bones or original bumpy texture, it's just a smooth fat blob in generally the shape of the tail, though often a bit thicker, shorter, and more blunt at the end.

Should be noted that it isn't geckos in general that don't grow it back, just that kind (crested gecko). Though a regrown tail in other species still will be substantially different than the original