I had something kiind of similar once, where it would only boot after trying to boot once, letting it run a bit in idle, and then rebooting where it would actually succeed. Turned out I forgot to put the clear cmos jumper back to neutral after i reset cmos.
So my best guess (other than new battery) is check the jumpers maybe
And my point was that it might not necessarily be worse for artists outside of the extremelg successful ones.
Counterpoint: Without music streaming or pirating I wouldn’t have discovered most of the artists I listen to. Artists of which I have bought concert tickets and merch (and in one case recurring support through youtube membership), and even just buying songs on bandcamp outright in spite of only listening via streaming.
Streaming is shit at generating revenue, but far far better at allowing artists to get noticed, which puts more power into the artists’ hands rather than labels. “Support what you like through donations and merch” seems like a much better model overall (and has been proven to work), which also allows people with less money to enjoy the music while those with money to spare support it (and usually artists would want nothing more than for everyone to be able to enjoy their work, but they also have to live off something).
Though this is an outside perspective and I’d be interested in what actual musicians have to say about it, particularly those that have been making a living/significant money off it both before and after the event of streaming (and not the huge ones, because they never had any exposure issues).
There’s also a chance that as a result of the discoverability, even if total money reaching the artists was unchanged, it’s split over more recipients, so it’s harder to actually make a living off it, but maybe easier to see at least some returns instead of it only being a money sink. Whether that’d be good or bad overall I can’t say.
Also since this thread is about games, I don’t think it really applies there since games are on average MUCH more expensive to make.
I mean yea that doesn’t surprise me in the slightest honestly, even outside of the number itself being pretty meaningless in the first place it’s very fuzzy what the actual dates are.
Average. It’s just an average. I haven’t verified whether the number is accurate (and often it’s probably debatable what qualifies as an empire and at what point it fell) but some empires lasting way longer does nothing to disprove 250 years being the average lifespan.
The second part of what you said is still entirely correct of course, that number has no real predictive capabilities for the collapse of the USA.
I never even thought it was that deep (idk if in other countries ppl go over it in school or something, I first heard of it online) so I never really understood how people are relating it to any economic system. All it’s saying to me is that one bad actor can be enough to ruin something for everyone - as far as I’m concerned it’s just prisoners’ dilemma in a larger group. So we need some way of enforcing that, if a shared ressource is vulnerable to singular bad actors (which isn’t all of them, e.g. some people abusing welfare doesn’t suddenly skyrocket costs), it won’t be abused.
Edit: just realized I forgot whether tragedy of the commons was about some few fucking up the pasture for everyone, or everyone slightly overusing it. The latter is ofc a bit different, but “ah I can cheat the system a little, I need it after all” isn’t an uncommon sentiment. That one usually just means you need a bit of a buffer, though, because most people won’t grossly abuse something. (And of course, it’s still quite independent of economic systems - regional software pricing for example is ultimately a capitalist thing to sell more, and yet would fall under this as it’s usually possible to get these prices from other regions.)
I’m only complaining about all the people that apparently regularly lost bottle caps. I don’t think that has happened to me ever… Not the end of the world and if it reduces litter I’ll deal with it but I curse these people every time one of the new caps is being annoying to screw back on.
Similarly, I’m not 100% sure about this but afaik the + got commonly added before the IA, and I really dislike adding anything specific after a generalized “everyone who feels part of it” because doing that delegitimizes that the + actually means everyone. Though it also does suck if people feel excluded otherwise.
I’ve seen queer used to refer to the whole community though, but I think LGBT(+whichever addendums) has just been around for so long it’s most people’s goto, plus “queer” used to be a slur.
In my head it’s just “people not conforming to the majority group for sex or gender related reasons” and then I write whatever my brain decides is the term in that moment. Usually LGBTQ+.
Hmm, as someone relatively deep into lgbtq issues (though particularly trans issues), I’d say the term itself is perhaps a bit misleading. The way I understand it and see it used is that it’s about heterosexuality and also gender norms within that traditional heterosexual relationship (so some people think that even in a homosexual relationship there’s always “a man” (dominant) and “a woman” (submissive)).
In that sense (to directly relate to the post) a dominant woman in a relationship with a submissive man would actually go against heteronormativity a bit.
On second thought I guess I can see the relation though, in the sense that the traditional “man is dominant in a hetero relationship” combined with the fact that by default most men probably mostly top could make someone see “topping is considered dominant” as reinforcing those traditional relationship norms. Still feels very overreactive by the original commenter but eh.
Heteronormative != heterosexual
I fail to see any issue with the post (like fucking everyone associates topping with dom that doesn’t mean it has to be, and the image works), but it’s decidedly a complaint about social norms rather than a group. Even if I think it’s not a valid complaint because wtf does it have to do with heteronormativity.
Yes, but that doesn’t make the comparison to all countries with over 500 000 people meaningful. It’s specifically that part that seems dishonest to me.
Though I suppose it is also possible that the full data has a few states where incarceration rates are more around the global average, which then would actually have a point in including other countries. Those weren’t part of the image posted here though (which was also dropped without context as to why it was posted)
Edit: yknow it occured to me i could click the link and yea, some states are indeed more normal, though still kinda high. That’s really the interesting part far more than the top of the list.
Yes, but that is not how the graph is framed. It’s framed as “look, if we put US states on a graph with other countries, they have such a high incarceration rate that there are almost no countries even on the graph!”
If it was honest and just trying to compare the incarceration rate of US states amongst each other (and the national average) it wouldn’t be titled “[…] in U.S. states and all countries […]”. It’s a clearly manipulative title.
The reason that a graph with this title could maybe make a point if it was absolute numbers is that most U.S. states’ population is less than most countries, so if individual states were still high on such a graph, that would be shocking.
They are, and I agree it’s misleading. It’s implying that it’s somehow shocking that the individual states of the county with the highest incarceration rate in the world also have a high incarceration rate. If it was absolute numbers, it would maybe make a point. As it is, it’s stating the extremely obvious and framing it as “look, it’s even worse than you thought”.
If humans are any indicator, they might also be doing things because they think it’s an advantage but actually does nothing.
It’s great in mobas where skills are universally referred to by their default binding on qwerty (since most layouts have qwer on those keys). So sometimes unaware french people talk about their a and z skills and everyone else is just confused
If you mean Kinder Joy that’s a different product that we have in europe as well
Oh damn. Very good article btw.
According to numbers floating around online, thiat would mean one llama query is around as expensive as 10 google searches. And it’s likely that those costs will increase further.
It still seems like the biggest factor here is the scale of adaptation. Unfortunately the total energy costs of AI might even scale exponentially since the more complex the queries get, the better the responses will likely be. And that will further drive adaptation.
This pace is so clearly unsustainable it’s horrifying, and while it was obvious to some degree, it seems it’s worse than I thought.
Using it, not all that energy intensive (one llm use is roughly the same as 3 pre-ai-bullshit google searches iirc). Training it, very energy intensive.
Yes it would but we haven’t even replaced all our previous needs with renewables so it aint helping.
Ime with ublock it’s not nearly as easy to manage allowing only specific scripts to run on each website to make it work but with less garbage added on compared to noscript
They’re technically voluntary but also socially expected. I’m not sure about birthday gifts in particular but Japan is a country where if you go on holiday somewhere you’re expected to bring a gift for each of your coworkers, and people will think worse of you for not doing that. I’d be kind of surprised if omitting birthday gifts for your romantic partner without prior agreement is a real option.