I mean even without knowing the area if you are hiking (which implies you are walking) 3.7 miles in 16 m then you are the apex predator of the world my friend. That's 20/25 km/h
It seems to not know that hiking=walking. Although it references Google Maps for its essentially driving directions, Google Maps itself gives reasonable walking directions. (The time is still pretty silly for most people given the terrain but I don't reasonably expect Google Maps to know that.)
(Yep. If you then tell it hiking is walking it gives you a reasonable response. It used to give you weird combinations of trails in the general area even when you tried to correct it. Now, with Google Maps info, it was confused about the mode of transit but if you cleared that up, it was correct.)
I agree with your comment but otoh would a guy on pcp no be just as deadly at 90 mph?
If we doing this we should rather do automated reaction speed/sobriety tests. Had a friend almost die bc he drove the day after being drunk bc he fell asleep from being sleep deprived even if he was "sober" by then
Hard to quantify 'deadly' but kinetic energy is proportional to velocity squared. 100mph has 23% more kinetic energy than 90mph and 56% more than 80mph.
It's just: I can go faster, if I want to (or for some reason need to).
I'm really not a fan of doing the Apple thing and to infantilize the user by disallowing sideloading because it's dangerous.
The discussion got dragged to compare force and impact but similarly to train tracks, highways are usually a place of motion. People don't walk around and cars are usually also fast.
We counter the emergency situation such as the infamous end of a traffic jam by adding brake assistants that warn the driver to brake and then hit the brake on their own. This kind of technology seems to reduce traffic incidents so that the most danger comes from older cars without this technology.
I completely agree, that we don't need hyper cars or racing cars on the road. But the 100 mph limit wouldn't help at all in cities. There are better ways like obstacles that force a driver to slow down or routing with curves instead of straight lines.
I really don't care for your analogy, speeding is a choice that puts others at risk and I think safety rules that protect everyone from each other, are far from infantilism.
But also, we shouldn't let perfect get in the way of good. Blocking 100mph+ may only improve safety on faster roads, but that's still a gross improvement. A few people a year are caught doing 150mph on 60mph single carriageways near me. Far more nationally, far more never caught, and exponentially more on superbikes.
If there's no legal reason to do 100mph on any road, why not just stop it being an option? Remove that temptation. It will save far more lives than it costs.
In the case in the article, when talking about geosensitive limiters, presumably they would have been limited to somewhere around the 35mph speed limit in the area.
While I can imagine it's possible that usage of substance A "breaks" new ground in your sensitivity to substance B by "opening" some new pathways, I find it unlikely:
The "standard" pathways for most substances is to build a tolerance to it (and similar compounds) over time of use. If you drink coffee a lot you don't get hyped by the same dose of caffeine, if you drink lots of alcohol it's harder to get you drunk, etc.
So if anything I'd expect "veterans" to be less sensitive to it. But there are substances that permanently reduce your tolerance to them, usually by causing some form of permanent damage, so it's possible that you might "break" something limiting your experience.
I find myself more and more over the year falling back to creating lots of "getOrCreateX(args)" and I must say I still haven't found a single scenario where this is worse than "get" and "create":
1) It helps with encapsculation of race conditions (you don't need to acquire locks outside to do if(get==null) { create } when you can have it in the function itself)
2) I normally don't care in my code if this is a pre-existing instance or one that I just created. I just want it now to use.
I know this is probably not the cause, and maybe it's just me being a naive SJW, but in my view London's financial institutions lost 90% of their credibility capital recently not so much because of Brexit (which hit them too) but because of the whole LME Nickel trade rollbacks shenanigans. Yes I know LME != LSE, and I know it was a lose-lose situation, but they co-exist and as a person who is not into finance they share their credibility to an extent.
That's not comparable at all to 4.80% APY savings and checking accounts in the U.S. right now with far more flexible rules.
This kind of return on ultra flexible accounts is basically unheard of in most of Europe in recent memory as far as I know (born & lived in Europe as recently as 2019). What you describe are called Certificate of Deposit (CDs) in the U.S. and you can get 5.50% for those in August 2023 [1].
If you define UK as Europe still, then yes, you can get an easy access(withdraw whenever you want) saving account with 5% interest without any issue. Or 6%+ if you're willing to lock the money for some time:
Sorry, I wrote cucumber by mistake instead of pumpkin and then edited my comment! (but cucumbers are also from the same family as squashes/pumpkins, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cucurbitaceae)
I'm not familiar with this notion (or much of German's political scene). Can you elaborate why the Greens are known fronts for the CIA there? (as in, what are giveaways?)
The way they immediately threw away their pacifism in favour of US-led interventionism when the Cold War ended. Unsurprisingly, it was also them screaming for military support for Ukraine instead of pushing for talks. Scholz at least feigned reluctance for a while.
The deindustrialization of Germany they are spearheading.
Remember, in the words of its first Secretary General, the purpose of NATO (and US posture towards Europe in general) is “to keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” That has not substantially changed. A hypothetical alliance between Germany and Russia is a nightmare for them and they would (and in fact do) go to great lengths to prevent it.
And where is the alleged connection to the CIA there?
The quote you pulled from the first(!) Secretary General of NATO is from 80 years ago. At the time it was said, 80 years ago was 1870, shortly after the American Civil War, just to give some perspective.
> Unsurprisingly, it was also them screaming for military support for Ukraine instead of pushing for talks.
Maaaan, that is just in the interest of Germany and generally any Western country. It was also the only moral and ethical position. One does not need to be paid by CIA to see this invasion and genocide for what they are.
If you think it through, the only reasons this “I’m a pacifist but” dime store morality can be entertained at all is because of the idea that Ukraine is winning, and because Western audiences (and to an extent even Ukrainian) have largely been isolated from the true costs of this war (to both sides; and also to Western economies and arsenals).
Ukraine is winning
I do not intend to litigate this again right now; we’re going to find out, most likely within a year, probably less.
Should Ukraine in fact lose, I hope you will remember then that a generous deal was on the table (no loss of territory except obviously Crimea), and so hundreds of thousands will have died (and in fact have already) for much less than nothing.
> If you think it through, the only reasons this “I’m a pacifist but” dime store morality can be entertained at all is because of the idea that Ukraine is winning, and because Western audiences (and to an extent even Ukrainian) have largely been isolated from the true costs of this war (to both sides; and also to Western economies and arsenals).
So your telling me if your family was in the occupied parts of Ukraine, being tortured by the Russians, raped, etc you’d be happy to hand over that territory to the Russians and just let it all go?.
> Should Ukraine in fact lose, I hope you will remember then that a generous deal was on the table (no loss of territory except obviously Crimea), and so hundreds of thousands will have died (and in fact have already) for much less than nothing.
Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians haven’t died yet so you’ll have to wait a bit longer for that to come true im afraid.
Atrocity propaganda is great for eliminating opposition at home. It doesn’t win you a war, though. And it bears repeating: the thing about wars is you actually have to win them.
The curious thing is that historically it’s always the good guys that have won, so I’m certain the Russians will not only prevail militarily but also in the moral dimension.
> Atrocity propaganda is great for eliminating opposition at home. It doesn’t win you a war, though. And it bears repeating: the thing about wars is you actually have to win them.
That’s not an answer to the question, then again I don’t think you’ll ever answer it.
> The curious thing is that historically it’s always the good guys that have won, so I’m certain the Russians will not only prevail militarily but also in the moral dimension.
Considering that Russia is doing similar things in Ukraine that they did in the first Chechen war, which they lost both on the battlefield and morally with their filtration torture camps.
This bodes well for Ukraine.
If you think the country that is raping and torturing children, committing genocide, committing crimes against humanity and razing entire cities to the ground is moral then you have a very different definition of moral than most people.
Conveniently ignoring the fact that they are on their 12th wave of mobilization, and that most of these men are not at all volunteering. The regime is literally abducting men from the streets and their homes. Men are in hiding from press gangs. Because it is the Ukrainian regime’s and the West’s fight not theirs.
Also, I’ve never called for Ukrainians to lay down their arms—those that actually want to fight.
wood-chipper
Foaming at the mouth. Back in the real world, this war is notable for its uniquely low ratio of civilian victims.
And if you think Russia had or has the goal of eliminating the Ukrainian people, reason and debate cannot reach you anymore. Many millions of Ukrainians have fled to Russia over the last nine years, and prosper—guess they’re next?
If it was your fight you would not be fighting me on HN.
The How does it affect you? meme. I’m part of the West and the West is at war with Russia and that does in fact affect me. And who knows where this could end.
The fact that the West is gleefully pouring oil into a fire that has already consumed hundreds of thousands; yes, that affects me.
Without Western “help” this would have been over within weeks, a few months at most. Suffering would have ended a long time ago. The regime might or might not have been replaced. For the vast majority of Ukrainians life would have resumed its normal course.
And if you think Russia had or has the goal of eliminating the Ukrainian people, reason and debate cannot reach you anymore.
О боже, нет. Not all of them. Just those few thousand or soon the "kill or capture" lists that were carefully prepared before the invasion. Along with anyone who refused to dig trenches, or to answer in Russian when spoken to, or otherwise showed anything less than the highest respect for the liberating forces during the special operation.
Or who were stupid and treacherous enough to have hid in that theater basement in Mariupol. When they should have been out in the streets, protesting against their Nazi occupiers. And welcoming their liberators with bread and salt.
The rest were meant for eternal subjugation: annexed to the Motherland and forcibly Russified, if they lived in predominantly Russian-speaking regions (and most likely a few buffer regions for good measure, and Kyiv itself). Those living in the Western regions would have to contend with living either in an outright vassal state, and/or one with limited sovereignty -- i.e. Finlandization but with much stronger "security guarantees" to Moscow.
What was scheduled for elimination was the very idea of Ukraine, and within the liberated regions, any expression of the vulgar, degenerate "Little Russian" language (is it even a langauge?) and culture (if we can even call it that), beyond a highly marginalized "kitchen" status.
Per all the things the current Tsar and his helpers have been saying, in the years leading up to the invasion. And of course what is currently happening in the liberated regions, as we speak.
Suffering would have ended a long time ago.
Suffering for the so-called victim would have ended long ago - if she would just lay back and yield to her suitor's perfectly natural and understandable wishes.
For the vast majority of Ukrainians life would have resumed its normal course.
Indeed - she might as well just relax, sit back - and enjoy the ride.
Absurdly strained metaphor that betrays a profound ignorance of matters of state and war in general and of the current geopolitical situation in particular.
Let me repeat once more: I have not called on Ukrainians to lay down their arms, however counterproductive their fight may be. I also understand the hard feelings.
But that’s not what’s at issue here. The situation we find ourselves in is the West fighting a proxy war against Russia. It was very much not the intention of Russia to get into such a fight, they made that clear. But the West smelled blood in the water and here we are. And I don’t expect perfect justice but we will pay for that.
In terms of materiel, the original Ukrainian armed forces are all but gone. The second, post-Soviet army they got is also mostly gone. The third and final army of Western gear is getting ground up good right now[0]. 20% in a month and that’s just what they are admitting.
There will be no fourth iteration. Either the West does the formerly unthinkable and drops the “proxy”, or, more likely, Ukrainians will find out what all those who once considered themselves friends of the US eventually found out: “He didn’t love me. I got used.”
As a consequence, after 17 months of bitter fighting, there is indeed a good chance that Ukraine (at least as we know it) will cease to exist.
I have not called on Ukrainians to lay down their arms.
Right - it would be impolitic to say this directly.
What you are doing instead is (effectively) calling for the cessation of all military aid. Which would inevitably force the Ukrainians to do just that, shortly enough thereafter.
And saying stuff elsewhere like "it certainly would have been the prudent thing to do for them", referring to the prospect of their capitulating in the early stages of the war.
So at the end of the day - this is precisely the outcome you're lobbying for.
It was very much not the intention of Russia to get into such a fight, they made that clear.
One would have to be absolutely deluded to believe this.
Which would inevitably force the Ukrainians to do that, at some point.
Of course. Welcome to the real world.
Without Western help this would have happened within weeks or months and would have spared so many. The terms would have certainly disappointed Russian (but also Ukrainian) nationalists. No “Regathering of the Russian lands”, not even close. In typical Putin fashion, the terms would have been fairly generous and conservative and satisfied few.
There probably was another chance for a relatively advantageous settlement in autumn 2022. “Position of strength”, at least politically. But then you got greedy.
Well, here we are. Wunderkätze got put down unceremoniously. Have a plan B?
One would have to be absolutely deluded to believe this.
Come on, you’re not even trying. Your side spent the better part of 2022 making fun of Putin’s “impotent bluff”. It’s either-or.
It is just not true that historically good guys always won. And looking at Russian history, they quite rarely won in the moral dimension. Even their past victories are rarely in the "morally good ones won" category.
Past Russian victories involve massacres, genocides, engineered famines and even staggering amount of own victims to the meat grinders of various kind.
The true cost of Russian occupation is torture, massacres, rapes, stealing of property including whole factories and what not. It is oppression, language suppression and literal genocide. It is children taken away from parents to be Russified and abused.
> I hope you will remember then that a generous deal was on the table (no loss of territory except obviously Crimea
This is a lie. There was no nice believable deal.
In the first place, Russia did not had to start yet another war after lying about them not wanting it, but here we are.
> If that’s what you’ve let yourself be convinced is the present then, boy, are you not going to enjoy the future.
The only one who's convinced themselves is you, you've convinced yourself that the Russians are saints who only do good and not the imperialistic, genocidal invaders that they are in reality.
《SPOILERS 》There is some idea that if conceived can destroy you. Greco wants to use it to attack the protagonist. The protagonist defends himself by delaying his perception and passing all inputs through a simulated concept so that when Greco communicates the idea it would destroy the sandbox and not himself. But Greco never tells the protagonist the idea. It just lets the protagonist formulate it themselves as a reaction to all the triggers Greco planted beforehand. Before in the story the prot limits his mind not to think "dangerous" things but the limitation of that model is that you need to have a way to describe what not to think about without thinking about them actively. Since hes not aware of the idea existing beforehand he has no limits in place against that. And so they lose their mind.
I had a slightly different take that there was no highly advanced "attack". Greco merely encouraged the protagonist to drop their ego boundary, causing the protagonist self-centered mental breakdown to occur. It seemed clear to me that throughout the story the main form of the protagonist unhappiness and stress stemmed from an egocentric orientation (total separation from society and nature).
