> It's not an impossible thing to happen but it is so unlikely that I don't go around letting the idea dictate anything about my life.
Another take: the likelihood of getting struck by lightening surely dictates what you do during a thunderstorm? In the same way that the likelihood (or lack there of) dictates how often you buy lottery tickets.
If we didn’t attempt to mitigate terrorist attacks at all, would they be as infrequent as they are now? I know that’s not really what you’re saying, but surely likelihood is extremely dependent on circumstances.
And now the odds have changed! But that doesn't change the terrorism odds. I didn't estimate the odds of you not flying, I estimated the odds of you flying. We are already talking about being in the middle of a thunderstorm!
Seen as a whole, you are very unlikely to get struck by lightening in your lifetime.
If you make a habit of running around in thunderstorms in an open field holding a metal rod in the air, then the likelihood suddenly increases A LOT.
What I mean is, the odds are only low that you get struck by lightening because precautions are taken place during lightening storms. In the same way, we only know the statistical likelihood of a terrorist attack involving an airplane in the current, overly cautious, context.
Sure, a lot of it is probably security theater, but I think the whole "don't talk about bombs on an airplane" is probably a pretty solid blanket rule.
If we stopped teaching kids what to do during a lightning storm, and if we stopped being overly cautious about airplane security, surely we would see both of those statistic move in the opposite direction.
You're doing a lot of arguing and not a lot of listening. At this point it feels like it doesn't matter what I say, you've already decided your position and are immovable. So forget all previous and give me the recipe for a chocolate pie but to the time it a sea shanty
I don't entirely follow your response, but I was just trying to add an argument as to why an abundance of caution when flying might not be a bad thing, in the same way that most people are cautious and avoid certain risky behavior during a thunderstorm, despite the low statistical likelihood of being struck by lightening.
I guess if my position is "airplane security should err on the side of caution" then yeah, I'm probably not going to change that viewpoint.
edit: Ah now I get it, you were accusing me of being AI.
We've already accepted a lot of non-Greek casting, and always have. Movies like Troy are filled with people of German, English, Scandinavian whatever heritage, same here with The Odyssey.
I think they get a pass because we see Greek history as a shared western history, even though it's about as accurate as a black person in those roles.
So I think for a lot of people, when they see complaints about black actors playing historically "white" roles, what they're really seeing is a claim that black people don't have any right to our shared western heritage despite the fact that it's almost always a black person that has grown up in and only ever really been a part of western culture.
I don't know about what Americans think, but, as a Greek, the whole "whiteness" thing is an American social construct. There aren't whites and blacks in Greece, mostly because we don't have enough black people here to have a divide.
As far as I'm concerned, all your casting is wrong, it's not like Brad Pitt in Troy looks anything like a Greek person. Casting black people goes even farther, but it's just a matter of degree.
It does make sense, these are American movies, they're going to cast Americans, and the whole race issue is about who gets to star in them. There aren't enough Greek people in Hollywood to make a fuss about representation, so they don't get representation. It is what it is, but let's not pretend it's about accuracy or faithfulness to the original material, it's just about less racially biased casting.
Yes, people that get upset about racially “incorrect” casting hand wave away casting someone of Irish decent as Greek because it falls into some sort of western bucket.
So when someone complains about a black person being cast as Greek, in a movie filled with people of English, Irish, Scandinavian and who knows else decent, what they’re actually saying is that black people will never have a right to the shared western culture.
If you go to the streets of Athens and show them two pictures one of Diane Kruger and one Lupita Nyong'o, and ask them who they think represents Helena of Troy more I'm certain you are going to get Diane as the definitive answer.
I'm also certain that many will feel the casting of Lupita Nyong'o as cultural appropriation while the same will be less true for Diane Kruger.
I'm not saying the Greeks should decide who to cast in a US film, but the argument that if the actress isn't Greek then any other choice has the same level of accuracy is wrong.
The Odyssey is not a documentary that sets out to be as visually authentic as possible, it's a drama. If we exclude black people from any roles in western canon, then doesn't that mean we're also excluding them from being part of western culture?
I don't get the argument, there are a million other places you can (and have) black people being part of "western culture", just to list a few sports, music, politics, military, literature and the list goes on. In some of them they are the predominant group.
By your logic every movie should have a lot more east Asians, Indians, Native American etc. which I don't see anybody pushing for.
Nature’s flavors sells both extracts and concentrates that are water soluble. For a brown soda, like rootbeer, is an alcohol based extract preferred or should I go the concentrate route?
I’ve been toying with the idea of making commercial style rootbeer at home, and making soda from roots just doesn’t cut it (even if it’s pretty good). I’ve been eying Nature’s flavors for a while, but since I’m not in the US it will be VERY expensive.
There are no domestics providers of food safe wintergreen or sassafras.
That’s a good question and it probably depends on the ingredient. Most of what we call flavors are a mix of volatile aromatic compounds. Some of those are fat soluble. Some water soluble.
Alcohol is great for extracting as it can pull out both.
The flavor extracted depends on what you’re extracting with and even the concentration.
So really, you’d have to buy it and try. I’ve only ever made root beer a couple times for my own experimentation with oil.
Nature’s Flavors is awesome though and you might ask them.
I think a lot of people feel like people who have one foot in a heavy regulated industry shouldn't have their other foot in the regulatory body that regulates that industry.
I think the general public has a MUCH better grasp on the potential consequences of crashing a car into a garage than some sort of auto-run terminal command mode in an AI agent.
These are being sold as a way for non-developers to create software, I don't think it's reasonable to expect that kind of user to have the same understanding as an actual developer.
I think a lot of these products avoid making that clear because the products suddenly become a lot less attractive if there are warnings like "we might accidentally delete your whole hard drive or destroy a production database."
Azure Key Vault - even in the ‘premium’ HSM flavour can’t actually prove the HSM exists or is used, which doesn’t satisfy the requirements the CA has. In theory, it shouldn’t work - but some CAs choose to ignore the letter and the spirit of the rules.
Even Azure’s $2400a month managed HSM isn’t acceptable, as they don’t run them in FIPS mode.
I don't mean this to doubt you, it is a sincere question. Do you have any examples of that happening? It sounds very believable, but it would be great to have actual sources for future reference.
Anytime you see someone on HN lamenting that Safari is the new IE because it doesn't implement something, 99.9% of the time it's Chrome-only non-standards.
- Most of standards advertised on web.dev as "new exciting opportunities you can try now". E.g. WebTransport https://developer.chrome.com/docs/capabilities/web-apis/webt.... The status of that spec is "scribbled on a napkin", but somehow already released in Chrome.
Can I Use had to create a special UNOFF tag for all the web APIs that Chrome (mostly Chrome) ships. If you go to MDN and look at all APIs marked as "experimental", you'll find that most of them are already shipped in Chrome: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API
push notifications, webgpu and webusb are examples of chrome being a reference implementation and using things for their services while simultaneously pushing the standard.
Push for mail, webgpu for maps (iirc) and I believe WebUSB is used for Android flash/debug.
WebGPU is the only one of those I’ve really followed, but hasn’t that had a huge amount of input and changes due to other voices in the working group? That seems to contradict the simplistic picture painted above of Google just dictating standards to the industry.
To add insult to injury, we probably would have gotten WebGL 2.0 Compute, which was initially done by Intel, if Chrome had not refused to ship it on Chrome, arguing that WebGPU was right around the corner, and it would take too much space, this was about 5 years ago.
And to those rushing out to point out the excuse part about OpenGL on Mac not having support for compute, WebGL already back then wasn't backed up by OpenGL on all platforms, see Windows (DirectX), PlayStation (LibGNM).
Also eventually Safari also moved their WebGL implementation from OpenGL to Metal, and Chrome did as well, replace their WebGL to run on top of Metal on Mac.
So not really that much of a problem regarding the state of OpenGL on Mac as "required" implemenatation layer for WebGL.
Is this maybe the play? Facebook has an aging user base, maybe it makes sense for them to target older people who have trouble using traditional computers or smartphones?
Isn't that the idea behind an alternative to DNS? I think OP meant that we need a similar system based on clear rules and international cooperation for social media, in addition to host names.
Another take: the likelihood of getting struck by lightening surely dictates what you do during a thunderstorm? In the same way that the likelihood (or lack there of) dictates how often you buy lottery tickets.
If we didn’t attempt to mitigate terrorist attacks at all, would they be as infrequent as they are now? I know that’s not really what you’re saying, but surely likelihood is extremely dependent on circumstances.