nymwit @ nymwit @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

151

Joined

2 yr. ago

the "teflon fumes" for lack of a better term are extremely toxic to birds

The stolen data included the person’s name, birth year, relationship labels, the percentage of DNA shared with relatives, ancestry reports, and self-reported location.

23andMe also confirmed that another group of about 1.4 million people who opted-in to DNA Relatives also “had their Family Tree profile information accessed,” which includes display names, relationship labels, birth year, self-reported location and whether the user decided to share their information, the spokesperson said.

This is of course bad but is everyone thinking that actual DNA information was copied or what? That's what it seems like from y'all's comments. I mean that's a pretty easy leap to make, it's a DNA testing company after all, but they seem pretty specific on what data got out. I don't immediately see that this specific information is worse than say what a credit reporting agency has on you.

The article says it is illegal for them to trade on nonpublic information. Isn't that the definition of insider trading?

In 2012, President Barack Obama signed the STOCK Act, banning members of Congress from trading with nonpublic information, meaning details they glean in their work that are not available to the general public.

Not saying it doesn't still happen, but it is illegal.

This dude is super creepy and I hate he's in congress, much less the speaker, but does anyone feel like the other headline "monitors each others porn activities" purposely makes it seem like they're each reviewing the porn they each do look at and making sure isn't toooo skeevy? Like it's weird enough, do you have to push it?

Made me picture them high fiving each other the next day, "yeah buddy! I saw that one, too. Nice."

one with wheels on it, right? Maybe important to note

probably the real pseudoephedrine containing sudafed and generic versions that are behind the counter and require a swipe of an ID to get from an employee. They don't want you making the meth by buying a million packs across the city or state, now do they?

Not really the right use I think. It was coined specifically to describe platforms' lifecycle of changing who they benefit. What's above is just constant churn in the attempt of infinite growth or just hanging onto market share trying to decide what people want (or tell them what they should want).

Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die.

A paid subscription service like O365 or spotify isn't too similar to the advertising "business partners" of a social media platform like tiktok. Of course language is descriptive rather than prescriptive but I feel like overusing this term loses the perceptive observation (and the message Doctorow wants to promote) of how these businesses work. Microsoft adding new features and spotify changing things to either make their app management easier (they claimed that's why they got rid of android widget for a while) or promote their own stuff doesn't seem to fit.

Kinda tough on a phone. Screen goes off, music stops. I know there are ways to get around it that yt doesn't want you to do but that is beside the point of "youtube is free". Everything is free if you do it that way.

Did you see the pictures? It's like the size of a sedan. Campervan seems a stretch.

This is a neat project....and terrible reporting.

Did they start out with any charge? How long to charge it fully via solar? How long it took them to do their trip? You could easily read this and think they did it by driving the full range (one of the few stats they give) out every day unless you're knowledgeable enough to see what they're not telling you. Is that range at 30mph? People are reading range figures and thinking, "well, gee, the EVs I can buy only do X and this does Y!", which isn't comparable at all without how that range is defined. If those figures shouldn't be compared to regular cars, then say it in the article! This is a 20-30 mile a day charged-by-solar-in-the-desert-near-the-equator vehicle, which isn't nothing, but not really as presented. Greenwashing (it's probably not) or whatever this should be called doesn't help the needed planetary shift away from fossil fuels.

Looking for other reporting (where are other commenters finding the duration of the trip?):

Guardian - no mention of time.

bonus: “We hope this can be an inspiration to car manufacturers such as Land Rover and BMW to make it a more sustainable industry. The car was actually very comfortable in the off-road conditions as it is very light and does not get stuck.”

Remind me how it was so lightweight again? Does it have LR & BMW level noise damping? It surely had AC and all that right? I don't know because that info wasn't provided. You don't need to convince LR and BMW, you need to convince consumers to go without those.

Daily Mail - no mention of time

Designboom - no mention of time

Jalopnik - no mention of time, which is disappointing for a car specific site

This is a cool project and it's cool university students did it, but why leave out such a misleading pieces of information? It's bandied about as a "showing people it's possible" thing as in, "you could have a solar car!", but leave out all the bits that really make it possible, like forgoing AC or the daily miles driven. That none of the reporting on this has this information either means [puts on tinfoil hat] it's a vast conspiracy to make green stuff look more palatable [tinfoil off], it's all confluence of interest in making it look more palatable, or the information just wasn't given out, or they're all referencing the same source news-wire style. Frustrating.

Where's the real information? I feel like we're in a race against time to move away from fossil fuels so things like this need to not be misleading.

Edit - I'm stupid, it does say week and a half long...which only proves the point I think in not contextualizing range and such, because that's a long time

Yeah, Universal Spower Bus. Sounds right. I was reading the "power" part emphasized in the comment you replied to. Prior to mass adoption by phone mfrs, USB wasn't powering all that much. You'd usually have 5v wall wart and cable ending in a barrel connector. Hate those things.

then we get to really specifically define individual, perspective, and perception (can you perceive while unconscious? I guess?), all sorts of fun knots to tie oneself into. I always thought the difference in sense vs. perception was the thinking about it, but if it's processed at all by the "unconscious" I guess it's still perception? I mean, I'm gettting twisted up thinking if my individual consciousness has a perspective from which it perceives the world

I think it's more they are murdering the current instance of a pattern of matter and with it the biological implementation of the pattern of consciousness. Another instance of the same pattern is created near simultaneously. To flip it, aren't they life creating machines as much as murder machines?

Is there a clear cut distinction between consciousness and self awareness? I think based on common usage, most folks wouldn't say you were conscious when sleeping, as usually it's said when sleeping you are unconscious. Sure your brain is still doing stuff and it's not just "keep the heart beating" stuff, but you're not aware of it.

That last one isn't really fair, we're animals and have attachments that can't be logically reasoned away. Our brains aren't entirely controlled by our conscious thoughts. You can believe 100% that the patterns of matter, not the matter itself, make the person but still not "feel" good about it.

Agree for Occam's if someone is actually suggesting they are replaced nightly or your last Thursdayism, but as for conceiving of parallels to a made up teleportation technology and its philosophical implications, is the break in consciousness/self awareness for sleep not a reasonable comparison?

I mean, is there a scientific consensus on what constitutes consciousness? I thought that was a stumbling point on trying to pin down the various parts of the study of it. I wouldn't say brain activity ceases while sleeping like that other comment but I'm in the camp that thinks the break in consciousness/awareness-of-being in a ST transporter is not really different than the break when sleeping.

I mean, folks really are laughing at her (when they're not weeping at the quality of representation) so....kinda levity? Just not the kind she's thinking of maybe.

discussion in here looking like old r/teenagers with predictable takes

I'm sure all the big businesses are on board for changing of entire federal department workforces every 4 years. They'll really be able to count on consistent rules to plan their business. Riiiiight.