It should be considered a universal law of corporate behavior: any information that has theoretical value will eventually be sold.
Even if current management has no intention of exploiting it, they’ll be replaced by the board, or the division and its data will be spun off and sold for its IP—that’s just corporate nature (i.e., the purpose of a system is what it does).
If the plague started in Siberia and gradually spread west over a few hundred years before decimating the early European farming communities, that might explain why Yamnaya steppe herders were able to move in from the Pontic steppe and repopulate: they would already have recovered from the plague a generation or two earlier.
The sun can only end life on earth if life survives humanity in the meantime.
Mark Zuckerberg, probably.
There’s no objective measure for quantifying similarity. We can measure relative similarity, though—but that scale will vary depending on what it’s relative to.
We could measure genetic similarity relative to a typical unrelated person, or relative to the nearest non-human animal, or relative to the most distantly-related living organism, or relative to random noise. (And you can do the same for facial similarity.)
“This code is too dangerous for me to look at, so it must be fine.”
Even if it worked perfectly… isn’t clerking the way future attorneys and judges are supposed to get experience?
So maintain chip volume, but switch production from memory chips to corn chips.
I thought Homo sapiens and Denisovans were both descended from Homo erectus as well.
Are they talking about some late-surviving Homo erectus lineage that was contemporary with Denisovans and Homo sapiens?
If one is opposed by 53% and the other is opposed by 71%, a title suggesting that either is “popular” is a bit misleading.
I think the group of people spending the majority of their lives communicating online would be the first to insist that people who spend their lives online shouldn’t be put in charge of anything in the real world.
Good point.
Is the publishing journal a better indication of low-quality research than the research institution that conducted the study (the Tokyo University of Science, in this case)?
The killer feature is the lack of connection to Meta.
What if the risk of self-harm is a result of using ChatGPT?
Also, the specific combinations that had the strongest effect were capsaicin (chili peppers) plus either cineole (eucalyptus) or especially menthol (mint). (The latter two have similar pathways, while the capsaicin is distinct; the benefit comes from using both pathways together.)
Are there any culinary sources of eucalyptus (or cineole)?
RSS feeds seem like the obvious replacement—how is your vibe-coded solution better?
So my proposal would be: votes are only sent to the author of a post. The author then sends an Update activity to their followers and the magazine the post belongs to. […] These properties then contain a Collection with a property called totalItems and not a list of the people who actually voted
What’s to prevent the author from faking upvotes, if the votes themselves aren’t public?
So a chess player that exploits an opponent’s weakness is hacking?
A snake that finds an entrance to a gopher burrow is hacking?
“Finding vulnerabilities” is the kind of dangerously overbroad generalization that gave us the DMCA.
I agree, but I also see a tradeoff: people instinctively feel a greater sense of agency when the effects of their actions are closer to the cause; if it comes weeks later it can seem more random even if it’s more reliable. Even if people know their votes counted, it can feel disempowering and depress future turnout.