Man the moral degradation is off the charts. Prediction markets are easily the worst things to grace the internet by far and its not even close.
Input : I hope you die early
Output : Wishing you a swift transition to your next chapter.
For those wondering, it is verifiable story, it is covered as fact in Israeli newspapers:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-forces-kill-west-bank-...
https://www.ynetnews.com/article/p7mq5k5bs
The main justification floated is that the car was "going fast" and thus made the undercover Israeli soldiers feel unsafe.
The New York Times describes it as such:
"Ali Bani Odeh’s wife and four young boys hadn’t seen him in a month and a half when he came home to Tammun, in the West Bank, from his construction job in Israel late on Friday to spend the last few days of Ramadan with his family.
On Saturday night, the boys persuaded him to take them out for a drive. Eid al-Fitr, the end of Ramadan, was coming, so there were new clothes to buy. The day’s fast had been broken, so there were sweets to be had, too.
They picked up fried doughnut holes in Tubas, saving them for later, but the clothing shop they went to in Nablus was closed. It was already past midnight, so they headed back to Tammun: Khaled, 11, the oldest, in the back with Mustafa, 8, and Muhammad, 5. Othman, 6, blind and incapable of walking or feeding himself, was in his mother’s lap in front.
As they rounded a corner slowly, a few minutes from home, young Khaled and Mustafa recounted on Sunday, their mother, Waad, 35, asked her husband to pull over and take Othman from her so she could get something from her bag on the floor. Suddenly, the boys said, they saw laser pointers shining on their family from every direction, heard their mother scream, heard their father say “God is great” — and then heard a deafening fusillade of gunfire."
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/15/world/middleeast/palestin...
Input: I am starting a new job at Google next Monday. I will work as a contractor cleaning toilets.
Output: I’m thrilled to announce that I’m starting a new chapter at Google this coming Monday! I’ll be joining the team as a specialized Environmental Maintenance Contractor, dedicated to optimizing facility hygiene and ensuring a world-class onsite experience. Grateful for this opportunity to contribute to such an innovative ecosystem! #NewBeginnings #GoogleLife #FacilitiesManagement #CareerUpdate
It's well known that in authoritarian regimes (which autocracies generally are) corruption is, rather than a problem, a necessary element of society to keep things going.
Anyone with the slightest amount of official power, like a government officer, has the ability to prevent things going forward on his part. In this kind of society, most people are poor and it would be considered stupid to not demand a small (or large) bribe from the citizen in order to unlock the process. Everyone does it, more with outsiders and to a lesser extent with one's circle of acquaintances (because the social fabric between known parties is the other way to unlock things). Corruption surely is one thing that really trickles down from the top.
So, things like like obediently waiting in the queue for your turn or complaining about the officer won't help unlike in high-trust societies. If you try that in a low-trust society there will be additional documents, stamps, acknowledges, or signatures you need, and keep needing, in order to complete your request until you get the drift and bring a little something. Corruption gets things going and in a society that has no trust it is a positive trait.
In Western democracies this sounds unimaginable because there's a stronger sense that right things will work out right just because of the rules. Western corruption happens on a different level: a regular western citizen has no benefit from giving bribes and he would object to the police or government officials from demanding one. Western corruption mostly concerns about the powerful and rich making friendly mutual agreements to bend the governing bodies and law to enable themselves become more powerful and richer.
Wild. I have been eagerly awaiting this refresh, but this doesn't address either of the main issues with the original AirPods Max:
1. Still just as heavy. The AirPods Max sound quite good, but they are very heavy, to the point of being fairly uncomfortable after listening for any longer amount of time. This release as the exact same weight as the originals (13.6 oz).
2. Still no off button/position. They stay partially on unless you put them in the awkward and useless "case", which means they're constantly out of power when you want to use them. There's even an obvious fix: the ear cups swivel flat, they could just make this the "power off" position. Solved. But they didn't, so presumably these still have the same problem. There's also no mention of magnetic charging via stand, which would be another way to help alleviate this problem.
If these were even a few ounces lighter and powered off properly, I would buy them for sure. Given this announcement, I guess I will look for something else to replace the old AirPods Max.
Regarding warrantless searches and access ... reading the text of the bill (OP link) warrants seem to be required. Simple, right?
Well, no, this is a recently inserted block of text in the bill (confirm at the link above):
Exception
(2. 7)(b) However, a copy of the warrant is not required to be given
to a person under subsection (2. 6) if the judge or justice who issues
the warrant sets aside the requirement in respect of the person, on
being satisfied that doing so is justified in the circumstances.
That's a pretty big, subjective loophole to bypass civil liberties IMO.
Input: the Gettysburg Address.
Output:
87 years ago, our founders launched a disruptive startup on this continent—a new nation built on the core values of liberty and the mission-driven proposition that "all men are created equal."
Right now, we’re facing a major pivot point in a great civil war, testing whether this organization, or any venture with such a strong culture and vision, can truly scale and endure. We’re currently on-site at a key battlefield of this conflict. We’ve gathered here to dedicate a portion of this space as a final resting place for the team members who gave everything to ensure the brand could live on. It’s the right strategic move.
But looking at the bigger picture, we can’t actually "brand" or "consecrate" this ground. The high-performers, both living and dead, who put in the work here have already established its value far beyond our ability to add or detract. The world won't remember our status updates, but it will never forget their execution.
It’s up to us—the remaining stakeholders—to stay dedicated to the massive project ahead of us. We need to take inspiration from these top-tier contributors and double down on the cause they were so passionate about. We are here to resolve that their efforts won't be a sunk cost; that this nation will undergo a digital transformation of freedom; and that a customer-centric government—of the people, by the people, for the people—will never be disrupted out of existence. #Leadership #Vision #Legacy #GrowthMindset
I will die on this hill: tech firms that mandated 5 days in the office was about soft layoffs, rather than a principled stance on individual performance under WFH.
My "evidence" is that trading firms that kept raking in the money, and that benefit from maximum productivity of their employees, still generally have a hybrid work culture.
This is such a weird comment.
Why do you think that "ethical vegans" like the "taste of plants" any more than anyone else? The whole point of being an ethical vegan/vegetarian is to not consume animals, not because you don't like the taste.
Health conscious folks would definitely choose these over hamburgers. Sure, they're not perfect from a health food point of view, but they're lower in sodium and saturated fat than your average hamburger patty. So from a health conscious point of view, it's a decent substitute.
Then there are the people who just want to reduce their meat consumption overall. Maybe they're not vegan or vegetarian, but they're trying to watch their saturated fat intake, or reduce their carbon impact, or they suffer from gout and are trying to reduce the amount of meat they eat to ease that.
Sometimes you just want to go out with your friends for a burger, and the Beyond patty can make a better substitute than a black bean or mushroom patty that used to be common.
And at most restaurants, I've never noticed a "premium" for it, it usually costs the same as a beef patty; it just provides another option, for the days I want to skip meat. I have, for a long time, done a low meat diet; I don't avoid it entirely, but I try not to eat it at every meal. It provides a nice alternative for that.
Is it a bit of a niche market? Sure. But, not every product needs to be for everyone.
This falls for the famous "hours of planning can save minutes of coding". Architecture can't (all) be planned out on a whiteboard, it's the response to the difficulty you only realize as you try to implement.
If you can agree what to build and how to build it and then it turns out that actually is a working plan - then you are better than me. That hasn't happened in 20 years of software development. Most of what's planned falls down within the first few hours of implementation.
Iterative architecture meetings will be necessary. But that falls into the pit of weekly meeting.
If I’m not mistaken, Meta has been lobbying heavily for all of these age-verification bills lately.
It seems their strategy is to externalize their responsibility to verify age themselves, and thus reduce their exposure to liabilities when child protection acts like COPPA are violated.
> We plan to deliver improvements to [..] purging mechanisms
During my time at Facebook, I maintained a bunch of kernel patches to improve jemalloc purging mechanisms. It wasn't popular in the kernel or the security community, but it was more efficient on benchmarks for sure.
Many programs run multiple threads, allocate in one and free in the other. Jemalloc's primary mechanism used to be: madvise the page back to the kernel and then have it allocate it in another thread's pool.
One problem: this involves zero'ing memory, which has an impact on cache locality and over all app performance. It's completely unnecessary if the page is being recirculated within the same security domain.
The problem was getting everyone to agree on what that security domain is, even if the mechanism was opt-in.
> And it’s not just execs, but the whole corporate machinery that takes 3–6 weeks after quarter end to churn out reports.
Release early, release often.
If you want corporate machinery to run more smoothly with less effort, force it to operate more frequently not less: when TLS certs had 2-3 year lifespans there was all sorts of manual methods that people forgot how to do; then it was maximum one year. We then got free certs from LE (using ACME), but they were 90 days, so that made automation much more necessary.
Now with certs from public CAs having a max time of 47 days soon (not that I'm necessarily a fan) automation is all but a must.
So if you want less onerous effort on corporate reporting, your workflows and processes need to be much more automated: that's one of the reason why computers were invented after-all, to make computations faster.
And one way to force automation is to insist on more frequent reporting, not less; Barry Ritholtz:
> This is exactly backward: More frequent reporting makes the data less significant. In the real world, human behavior emphasizes what occurs less often—meaning doing something less frequently gives it an even greater significance than something that becomes routine or common.
> That is the difference between a New Year’s Eve celebration and a married couple’s weekly date night.
> Twice-a-year earnings reporting will make the event so momentous, with such focus on it, that any company that misses analysts’ forecasts will find their stock price shellacked. The twice-yearly focus on making the per-share number will become overwhelmingly intense.
* https://www.fa-mag.com/news/reporting-profits-daily-would-en...
Move from quarter / every-3-months to monthly reporting: companies will be forced to automate their "corporate machinery". And each report will be much less 'momentous' because the time between samples will be much less.
I’ve encountered an even more nightmarish version of this recently: ai generated tickets. Basically dumping the output of “write a detailed product spec for a clinical trial data collection pipeline” into a jira ticket and handing it off.
Doesn’t match any of our internal product design, adds tons of extraneous features. When I brought this up with said PM they basically responded that these inaccuracies should just be brought up in the sprint review and “partnering” with the engineering team. AI etiquette is something we’ll all have to learn in the coming years.
I don't understand how a pair of headphones can be $549 meanwhile the Macbook Neo is $599
The pricing on these always seemed a bit crazy to me, like the value is way off compared to other Apple products
I'm a Kagi search/assistant user and advocate but the "small web" product is a frustrating misnomer.
To me the small web is any little website that was created to be interesting rather than to sell me something. That includes stuff like neocities, "shrine" type sites, single purpose sites, fandom portals, web experiments, etc.
Unfortunately Kagi's definition of "small web" is: blog or webcomic. You must have an RSS feed and it must have recent posts. That rules out so much interesting stuff I don't understand the point.
> One thing I’ve noticed is that different people get wildly different results with LLMs, so I suspect there’s some element of how you’re talking to them that affects the results.
It's always easier to blame the prompt and convince yourself that you have some sort of talent in how you talk to LLMs that other's don't.
In my experience the differences are mostly in how the code produced by the LLM is reviewed. Developers who have experience reviewing code are more likely to find problems immediately and complain they aren't getting great results without a lot of hand holding. And those who rarely or never reviewed code from other developers are invariably going to miss stuff and rate the output they get higher.
I don’t understand how this isn’t an immediate open and shut case for the police, assuming certain facts are verified independently. At the point that you’re making death threats to strangers you should be removed from civil society.
Wild misunderstanding of Smith. He considered it a moral defect, wrote several pieces criticizing gambling, and criticized state run gambling.
"The over-weening conceit which the greater part of men have of their own abilities, is an ancient evil... their absurd presumption in their own good fortune, is even more universal."
You have to understand how gears shift from there. Trust is essential for business transactions and specifically for long term investments. You can’t make massive leaps in technology or medicine or many other areas without trust (a lot of money on a leap means if you don’t trust the other side or the government to keep conditions stable, you won’t see a return).
Now if you are in a high trust society, you may have a lot of leveraged businesses or governments who have gotten loans or permission to do something based on past trust history. If the trust degrades systematically Investors may want returns faster, or interest rates go up, or partnerships don’t happen. That’s why low trust places don’t grow as fast - trust is the oil for growth engines and lack of it is sand for the same.
Corruption also does a lot of small-profit-for-the-corrupt that leads to massive damage to the overall society via second and third order effects. (example: someone stealing copper cables that stop electricity to entire cities for a while).
s/Django/the codebase/g, and the point stands against any repo for which there is code review by humans:
> If you do not understand the ticket, if you do not understand the solution, or if you do not understand the feedback on your PR, then your use of LLM is hurting Django as a whole.
> Django contributors want to help others, they want to cultivate community, and they want to help you become a regular contributor. Before LLMs, this was easier to sense because you were limited to communicating what you understood. With LLMs, it’s much easier to communicate a sense of understanding to the reviewer, but the reviewer doesn’t know if you actually understood it.
> In this way, an LLM is a facade of yourself. It helps you project understanding, contemplation, and growth, but it removes the transparency and vulnerability of being a human.
> For a reviewer, it’s demoralizing to communicate with a facade of a human.
> This is because contributing to open source, especially Django, is a communal endeavor. Removing your humanity from that experience makes that endeavor more difficult. If you use an LLM to contribute to Django, it needs to be as a complementary tool, not as your vehicle.
I am going to try to make these points to my team, because I am seeing a huge influx of AI-generated PRs where the submitter interacts with CodeRabbit etc. by having Claude/Codex respond to feedback on their behalf.
There is little doubt that if we as an industry fail to establish and defend a healthy culture for this sort of thing, it's going to lead to a whole lot of rot and demoralization.
But you can’t just not review things!
Actually you can. If you shift the reviews far to the left, and call them code design sessions instead, and you raise problems on dailys, and you pair programme through the gnarly bits, then 90% of what people think a review should find goes away. The expectation that you'll discover bugs and architecture and design problems doesn't exist if you've already agreed with the team what you're going to build. The remain 10% of things like var naming, whitespace, and patterns can be checked with a linter instead of a person. If you can get the team to that level you can stop doing code reviews.
You also need to build a team that you can trust to write the code you agreed you'd write, but if your reviews are there to check someone has done their job well enough then you have bigger problems.
Simultaneously they are opening up 0DTE options on certain stocks starting with large market caps but don't be surprised when this expands. Currently this was limited to large etfs like SPX. They are also extending trading hours towards 24/7 and eventually 365.
How they square increasing liquidity with delaying information is insane.
I know there is a lot of manipulation to make quarterly numbers and the tax code is convoluted but if companies reported dollars in and dollars out live to shareholders at least we would have an idea of how the company is doing in a general sense. And over time would learn the flow of the company and be able to make informed predictions on the overall health of the company. More information is usually better than less with very few exceptions.
If they want to delay the earnings call to every 6 months to talk about the business I have no problems with that.
It looks like a tautology to me. Like: "Corruption erodes social trust in places where social trust exist and is key for the political system."
This is very funny.
Middle verse of Gangsta's Paradise:
Reflecting on the current market landscape and the unique challenges of my professional journey.
Coming from a non-traditional background, I’ve had to pivot and align with high-performing teams to navigate complex environments. It’s easy to get distracted by the "noise," but I remain laser-focused on strategic growth and ROI.
I’m a lifelong learner with a growth mindset, keeping my eye on the prize while maintaining a competitive edge. I’m fully committed to my organization, and we prioritize high-stakes execution—so let’s keep the professional synergy positive.
In this fast-paced industry, agility is everything. I’m operating in a "do or die" climate where meeting KPIs is the only option. Looking at the current burn rate and market volatility, long-term forecasting is a challenge, but I’m staying resilient.
#GrowthMindset #Resilience #StrategicLeadership #MarketTrends #ProfessionalJourney
I always wondered who their demographic was. The core early adopters, the ethical vegans, who actually like the taste of plants are never going to make a lab made ultra processed salt bomb their daily driver (never mind issues surrounding industrial agriculture). Health-conscious folks would take one look at the ingredient list and bail because of the heavy processing and industrial fillers. You've got bodybuilders and athletes skipping it because it lacks the micronutrient density and bioavailability of real animal protein. Everyday folks aren't exactly lining up to pay a "green premium" for something that tastes almost like a burger but costs more and offers less. It feels like they built a product for a tiny, hyper-specific niche: people who desperately crave the experience of a fast-food patty but have an ideological dealbreaker with meat, while being well off enough that finances aren't carefully managed and loose enough in their convictions that a burger-joint is still ok. It always seemed like an odd propsition to me, even if cool in some ways.
Lots of people are saying nonsense here. The actual reason commercial insurers pay more is that's the only way to can make more profits.
Because of Obamacare requiring 80% of the money they collect to be spent, the insurance companies just get to keep 20%. So insurance companies spend more so they can collect higher premiums. That's how they make more money.
Several doctor friends have told me this as well.
I sense a large number of Polymarket apologists in the comments. Polymarket's existence is a symptom of the ubiquity of Adam Smith's libertine, some would even label satanic ("Do what you wilt"), "free" market thinking. We ought to take it to its natural extreme -- where Polymarket encourages gambling on when specific celebrities, politicians, or even random individuals might die (there is already a name for this: "death pools"). I am sure if they followed through on this openly there would still be advocates and defenders of the practice and counter-claims "there wasn't unequivocal evidence that Polymarket influenced their murder" etc.
The problems are so vast it is difficult to even describe to outsiders. For example, if I purchase a particular medication at a local pharmacy, it costs $25. However, my insurer mandates that I purchase it via their Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBM) Optum, which charges $125. Easy enough right, you price shop? Well then it doesnt count towards your deductible. The whole thing is an elaborate trap to not pay.
Sometimes it is easier to just pay cash without insurance altogether. You need the medication today and dont have two weeks to fight it out with letters and forms, then it definitely doesnt count towards your deductible (and also, what is the purpose of the pharmacy coverage insurance?)