> After 9/11, there's no world in which any attack on the US homeland, however small or local, is met with anything other than overwhelming retribution.
Yes remember when they invaded Saudi Arabia? That taught everyone an important lesson on the consequences of terrorism on American soil.
The hijackers were Saudi nationals, but the operation was in no way sponsored by the Saudi state, which is a staunch US ally. Which is why the US proceeded to (attempt to) flatten Afghanistan instead.
The suggestion that Cuba would risk that for no obvious benefit is weird. Some wildcards in Cuba might be doing this unsanctioned. But any Cuban sanctioned/sponsored attack is very unrealistic.
Cuba is the easiest target the US could have. It's very close to the US and very far from any potential ally. The US has never shied away from committing acts of extreme cruelty, well into terrorist or war crime territory. From dropping nuclear bombs on civilians, phosphorus bombs, drone bombing innocent people, schools, hospitals, institutionalized torture, etc. even with far weaker reasons.
There is no scenario where a direct attack on the US wouldn't lead to an extremely violent response in complete disregard of Cuban lives. And get away with it.
Not a good sign that the first person they quote, Merz, is so anti wind turbines that his right-wing business supporters had to tell him to shut up about it.
His new position is that they are "temporary" and will be replaced with fusion.
It only works to a certain extent as it's more like shaving (or padding) the cell and for Monaspace in particular seems to have weird impacts on the context healing if you take it too far.
But I find it (and some vertical padding) helps get closer to the Victor Mono proportions I was used to as long as you don't go too far. It's maybe more like reducing letterspacing which Victor Mono also had less of.
A few people thought this, there's a GitHub ticket for it which they closed after they added a variant in v1.2 for a standard i and a loopy l that you can opt in to use.
Can't quickly find a screenshot though you can use web dev tools to add
It's really this simple. People seem so confused as to why this administration is doing this and why this administration is doing that, but it's clearly about personal enrichment of leaders. It's not some complex 5D chess game. If you want to know why Trump did this or why Hegseth did that or why Bondi did thus, just look at who placed bets, owns stock, owns companies, and/or will be personally enriched by the decision. That's all there is to it.
You can install the complete text of Wikipedia locally too.
They've usually been intended for ereader/off-grid/post-zombie-apocalypse situations but I'd guess someone is working on an llm friendly way to install it already.
Be interesting to know the tradeoffs. The Tienammen square example suggests why you'd maybe want the knowledge facts to come from a separate source.
The Wikipedia folks are now working on implementing a language-independent representation for their encyclopedic content - one that's intended to be rigorously compositional and semantics-aware, loosely comparable to Universal Meaning Representation (UMR) as known in the linguistics domain, that - if successful - may end up interacting in very interesting ways with multi-language capable LLMs. Very early experiments (nowhere near as capable as UMR as of yet, but experimenting with the underlying software infrastructure) are at https://abstract.wikipedia.org , whilst a direct comparison of the projected design is given by https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Abstract_Wikipedia_N...https://elemwala.toolforge.org/static/nlgsig-nov2025.html
It feels like you'll soon need a local llm to intermediate with the remote llm, like an ad blocker for browsers to stop them injecting ads or remind you not to send corporate IP out onto the Internet.
It doesn't really matter if the individual companies make money.
Is the society better off with EVs?
For any nation that need to import the fuel, the obvious answer is yes.
Cheaper, more efficient transport that causes less pollution and reduces reliance on fickle energy supliers is a step up the civilizational ladder.
For nations that sell the fuel it's more complicated but I think the game theory works out in the end as EVs being better for them too.
Are the benefits from the oil sales being broadly distributed? If so you're likely to see EV uptake. Is it hoarded by oligarchs? Maybe they'll slow walk the EV transition in areas they control.
Yes remember when they invaded Saudi Arabia? That taught everyone an important lesson on the consequences of terrorism on American soil.
reply