Off-and-on trying out an account over at @[email protected] due to scraping bots bogging down lemmy.today to the point of near-unusability.
“I don’t know how he became the chief of the Border Patrol with his character,”
In all other regards, the current administration had maintained such a high bar for ethics in selecting high-ranking officials that this instance could scarcely be believed.
Sure, I’d like that, but I’m not going to keep personally fighting to make life better for that manufacturer’s customers. Not when there are other car manufacturers that aren’t pulling that stuff that people can be directed to.
Is the message you want to send “if you buy product from a vendor who actively goes out of their way to dick over open-source developers, it probably won’t matter for me as a customer because those developers will keep expending time and accepting legal risk to try to improve the situation for those customers”? Or do you want it to be “you probably want to look for open-source friendly manufacturers”?
I don’t really see the point. I mean, why bother to try to do something that just makes the company’s printers more desirable? Even if you “win”, the company is going to be a pain in the ass. Do you really want to waste time and financial resources on improving the company’s product?
Just don’t buy Bambu Lab printers. Don’t recommend them. And don’t support them with software.
If this was a world in which there was one 3D printer manufacturer, it’d be different, but it’s not. They have competition.
Not quite what you’re asking for, but when I first heard the phrase “balls to the wall”, I thought that it alluded to testicles. One of the Grand Theft Auto games has some radio audio that uses it satirically in this sense as well (“Lazlow, get your balls to the wall” or something similar).
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/balls_to_the_wall
First attested in the 1960s in the context of aviation, in reference to ball-shaped grips on an aircraft’s engine controls (typically throttle, prop pitch and fuel mixture). Pushing these “balls to the wall” would put the aircraft at maximum thrust.[1][2] Analogous to pedal to the metal. Not related to the term balls-out, which refers to a ball governor on a steam engine.[3] Neither balls-out nor balls to the wall is connected with the vulgar sense of balls (“testicles”) except via folk etymology.
EDIT: The GTA audio in question (the song itself used the phrase satirically, and the announcer does as well):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVWwG6RJrLA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balls_to_the_Wall_(album)
Balls to the Wall is the fifth studio album by German heavy metal band Accept, released in 1983. It is Accept’s only record to attain Gold certification in the US.[1] The album’s title track became Accept’s signature song and remains a metal anthem and trademark in the genre.
but it literally is just Thacker Pass.
This isn’t Thacker Pass.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_lithium_mine
The Thacker Pass lithium mine is a lithium clay mining development project in Humboldt County, Nevada
The location being discussed:
McDermitt Caldera in Oregon
It looks like there was some discussion that there might be lithium there a bit back, like in 2023, but this is not decade-old news.
So, visa length restrictions might be a reasonable approach for some types of illegally-operated businesses. I could buy this:
Authorities have also launched operations against foreigners accused of illegally operating bars, restaurants and tourism businesses in popular resort areas.
But…
Security concerns escalated further this month after Thai police arrested a Chinese national in Pattaya who was allegedly found in possession of a large cache of military-grade weapons, including assault rifles, explosives, grenades, Russian landmines and anti-personnel mines.
The suspect, arrested on 9 May, was charged with illegal possession of unauthorised weapons and could face up to 10 years in prison.
Like, that seems like it’s a customs problem. I mean, if you’re seeing said weapons illicitly entering the country in the first place, that seems like it’s already running afoul of most issues that you might have. I don’t think that it’s going to matter much whether it’'s a Thai native gunrunning or a Chinese national.
It’s not that they lasted longer, but that it was considerably less expensive to recharge them than to buy and throw out a new set of batteries for each session.
Alcohol and/or drugs, I imagine.
That thing drank 6x AA batteries like there was no tomorrow.
There were NiCad rechargeables. I didn’t own a Game Gear, but a friend did, and I remember him using NiCads for that and RC vehicles.
I still read a few things on Reddit occasionally, and I’ll search for answers using site:reddit.com. I just don’t log in or post.
And…let me make it even more concrete. I’d say that there are basically two scenarios:
We establish that AI — for some definition of AI — is simply too dangerous for humanity to have. In that case, the right path is to ban AI globally. That means that nobody gets it. Some coalition of countries is going to have to be willing to attack anyone who tries developing it. In that case, what we have is effectively an arms control restriction baked into customary international law. It is not optional to participate. And, for all the future of humanity, we need to be willing to enforce that. It means that we need a viable verification protocol to ensure that nobody is developing it, as is normally the case for arms treaties. And everyone has to submit to that verification protocol.
We don’t. In that case, we want to develop AI sooner rather than later.
I am certainly not willing to say that #2 is the “right” scenario and #1 is the “wrong” one. But if we decide on #1, that comes with a lot of things that we need to be doing as a species. It’s not just going to be the pre-computer-era status quo persisting, where our limited state of technology was what maintained the situation.
EDIT: I’d also add that, just as that I’m not sure that Friendly AI is a solvable problem, I’m also not sure that it’s really viable to have a verification protocol where we can prevent development of AI. Past arms control treaties where I think that verification was likely much easier — it’s hard to hide development of major warships under the Washington Naval Treaty, for example, yet there were still parties evading restrictions — were not always successful. #1 comes with its own set of hard problems too. Are parallel compute processors legal? What about their development and production? Under what restrictions are they used? Is it possible to achieve advanced AI using CPUs (my guess is that it likely is)? If so, what new restrictions will need to be placed on use and access to CPUs? How will we identify entities building production facilities to build CPUs and GPUs? Will we need to track all existing CPUs and GPUs, to try to identify entities who might be stockpiling them? How will we monitor what the great stores of those out there now are being used for?
If we go with #1, that also entails a different world from the one that we live in today.
I’ve got some pessimistic views as to long-term AI concerns — I’m not sure that aligning advanced AI goals with human goals in the long run is a viable problem to solve. We may not be able to achieve Friendly AI. I could believe that.
But I certainly don’t think that AI development is “moving too fast”. Not really anything to gain in slowing down development. I remember Elon Musk proposing a six-month moratorium on development — that doesn’t make any sense, only would be something that you’d want to do if you had an immediate milestone that you believed that there was major risk attached to. In general, either AI is something that you should ban globally because it’s too much of an existential risk for humanity, and halt all development and enforce that halt, or you’d like to achieve it as soon as possible. We are not at a point where there is a consensus that that level of unacceptable risk exists and there is a global commitment to enforcing such a global prohibition.
I can believe that there might be an excess of infrastructure development in particular, that we might not have the research side moving as quickly as need be to support that. Like, we might be doing misallocation in buying a lot of specific chips without establishing that those chips are going to provide a worthwhile return. But in terms of the technology advancing…no, can’t agree there.
I also don’t think the average American who is struggling to buy food
While I do take your point that what Trump’s talking about may or may not matter to a given individual, I’d also point out that the average American isn’t struggling to buy food.
https://ourworldindata.org/food-prices
https://lemmy.today/pictrs/image/42c81299-bad4-4140-a849-c79a4515e402.png
The US has about the lowest percentage of expenditure going to food in the world, and that’s been true for a long time.
“Anybody that wants them to have a nuclear weapon is a stupid person. So we said we’re going to take the greatest stock market in history and we’re going to go down a little bit. And actually that turned out to be incorrect, because our stock market is now at the highest point in history, which frankly, surprised a lot of people,” he said.
The stock market is up because of the AI boom. Trump didn’t have much to do with the AI boom.
https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/ai-stocks-drive-nearly-p-094305210.html
AI Stocks Drive Nearly All of S&P 500’s Gains, Data Reveals
The S&P 500 has surged to fresh record highs in 2026, powering through milestone after milestone as Wall Street toasts another banner year.
Strip out the artificial intelligence stocks, though, and the rally all but disappears, leaving a market that has gone essentially nowhere since February.
S&P 500 ex-AI Index Flat Since February as Benchmark Climbs 8%
BeInCrypto recently reported that AI-linked stocks now account for a record 45% of the S&P 500’s market capitalization. Strong rallies in hyperscalers and AI-related stocks have helped push the index higher, as investors continue betting on the sector’s long-term growth potential.
The S&P 500 has climbed nearly 7% since early February. While the war-driven volatility caused notable losses in March, the rally accelerated in April, with the index gaining 15.5% since March 30.
However, the gains have not been evenly distributed across the market. According to Google Finance data, the US 500 Excluding Artificial Intelligence Enablers Price Return Index (SPXXAI) has fallen 1.84% since its February launch.
For Trump, that was luck — he happened to be in the right place at the right time to benefit from that.
Mount a rooftop antenna if you’re into various forms of radio — CB, ham, shortwave, running a radio scanner, terrestrial broadcast digital TV, etc. Height is helpful there.
You can probably get some kind of automated watering system, if that’s your concern with the vegetables. Maybe need to fill a tank occasionally, but outside of that…shrugs.
Some people like rooftop beekeeping. Don’t need frequent access for that.
Can throw some solar panels up there as a source of emergency power if the power goes out; if you put them above head height, then you’ve also got shade.
I’m guessing that this is an urban environment (“access to” sounds like a multiunit building) so it probably has light pollution in the area, but if not, could maybe throw a telescope up there for unobstructed access to the sky. I’ve occasionally wondered about how hard it’d be to get some kinda motorized pan-tilt-zoom telescope-attached camera just to pan around and look at stuff on the ground on a monitor, and if you’re looking at the city, it might be fun, kinda like adding an expansive view downstairs. I have some relatives that have housing with a nice view, and they liked to have tripod-mounted telescopes to look out and check out everything. In your case, probably want something remotely-operated, but same idea.
Does Kickstarter have liability in general for Kickstarted projects? I’d kind of assume that that’s on the specific project. I can’t imagine that Kickstarter is in any kind of position to really do a domain-specific evaluation of whether a given project is in line with local regulations.
they are impervious beasts
Try sticking some Raid into whatever they’re chewing into.
https://www.amazon.com/Raid-Wasp-Hornet-Killer-33/dp/B000BQMOF2
First, Peltier elements are pretty inefficient. Second, I’m dubious about the design — a Peltier element moves heat from Point A to Point B, and the whole device appears to still sit beneath the shirt. I suppose that the hot side is the outer side, but what you’d ideally want is to have hot air blowing as far away from you as possible.
I’m skeptical that it’s better to carry a battery-powered Peltier element than to carry something like an evaporative cooler. That’s more-energy-efficient, and you don’t have the problem of part of the device getting hot.
EDIT: Or, if you can’t leverage phase-change from liquid water to water vapor because of high humidity, cooling vests that leverage solid to liquid phase-change.
How a Cooling Vest Invented by a Furry Made Its Way Into the U.S. Military
A legitimate victory by forfeit.