Technology is generally considered to be something that is invented: there's a debate in whether language is invented/created or whether it is innate to humans (you wouldn't say sight or hearing are technologies).
Also a debate on whether math is created/invented or discovered (IMHO hard to argue that pi (π) is invented).
> There are certain bodies of human knowledge and practice which aren't usually referred to as "technologies", and I think that leads us to underestimate their complexity and importance.
> Reputation is a technology. We solve a lot of problems in the economy by turning one-shot games, in which people literally take the money and run, and turn them into repeated games, in which people have an incentive to behave well in this period so that you will trust them next period, and so on, into the future.
Has any other president fired the the FBI directory because he wouldn't swear personal loyalty to him (like Trump did Comey)? Did any other president try to do a (self) coup?
You may disagree with their policies (and even values), but would have anyone else tried to do an end-run around the Constitution? Pence went through with the 2020 election certification even when people were literally calling him for to be lynched.
The Boeing wag given to the US government. Not to Trump personally. It's stated explicitly in the wikipedia link you provided.
> Any Democratic candidate, including Harris and Clinton. With GOPers: Pence, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, DeSantis, etc.
So you're fine with any other crook, but not Trump. Got it.
Further, wikipedia is not a credible source link in-case you didn't know. Anyone can edit the pages there and somethings are verified and sometime once could even make up facts and link to fake articles.
The Boeing wag given to the US government. Not to Trump personally. It's stated explicitly in the wikipedia link you provided.
Also stated in a news report[1] linked by Wikipedia,
In what may be the most valuable gift ever extended to the United States from a foreign government, the Trump administration is preparing to accept a super luxury Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet from the royal family of Qatar -- a gift that is to be available for use by President Donald Trump as the new Air Force One until shortly before he leaves office, at which time ownership of the plane will be transferred to the Trump presidential library foundation, sources familiar with the proposed arrangement told ABC News.
The vast majority of examples in the link are either presidents firing members of their own staff, or firing people for not doing their job well. A large number of Trump firings were because people were doing their job.
>> Any Democratic candidate, including Harris and Clinton. With GOPers: Pence, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, DeSantis, etc.
> So you're fine with any other crook, but not Trump. Got it.
What have those people done, particularly Harris, Clinton, Kasich, and Pence that would qualify them for the "crook" title? And have any of them done such things within an order of magnitude or two of the rate and intensity that Trump has done them?
Had you ever been to a college and used wikipedia link as a source reference when writing a paper you would've known. But I guess for you it's just asking from some probabilistic token generator I guess.
>The Boeing wag given to the US government. Not to Trump personally. It's stated explicitly in the wikipedia link you provided.
>The aircraft is slated to be transferred to Trump's presidential library foundation shortly before the end of his second term, though critics argue that such a transfer may be unconstitutional.
So it will go to Trump, but only after getting the government to pay billions to upgrade it.
Integrity not to burn down the system and/or enrich themselves? All of them: Biden, Obama, Bush43, Clinton, Bush41, etc (maybe Nixon the least). If Hillary Clinton or Harris would were elected they would have been as well.
You may be disagree with their policies, and think perhaps they're helping certain special interest groups, but has anyone tried to enrich themselves while in office (versus book deals and speaking fees once they're out)?
> I think the need for lossless images within a web page is extremely niche.
Sure, but if companies are going to put in the effort to support a format, you might as well work towards supporting the 'full capabilities' of it, that way it can be used in as many workflows as possible.
You want your camera, photo editing software, colour correction process, etc, to support lossless. One of your final outputs may be for the web where lossless is not important, but there may be others as well (e.g., as a graphic in a video production).
JPEG XL on the web does not arrive there ex nihilo: there is a production pipeline that creates and puts files on web servers and points to those files in HTML tags.
That production pipeline may also be used to generate images for things besides the web, so the creators have the choice of having one set of files used everywhere, or one set for the web and a second set for other things.
That JXL lossless is overkill for the web may be overridden by the fact that people don't want to deal with the hassle of multiple sub-sets of files (i.e., laziness or "efficiency").
Spack, at least, is also very much at home outside the HPC environment. Works on macOS and Windows (though Windows packages aren't quite as mature as Linux and macOS). Doesn't require environment modules to use.
Also, latest Spack builds in parallel. You can do that with pkgsrc using external tools like Bob [1], but Spack sets up a GNU jobserver, which LLVM and ninja now support in addition to gmake. So you get very dynamic parallelism. See the FOSDEM talk [2].
HEIF isn't an Apple owned format, most modern cameras have it as an option alongside JPEG now. The situation is JPEG is woefully outdated, lacking in HDR support and dated compression. HEIF is technically much better but patent encumbered.
JPEG-XL offers all the benefits of HEIF and more, while not being patent encumbered.
I'm also thinking the OP meant HEIC, but I know that it is not proprietary (though as noted patented), and wanted to make sure, as a lot of people of all sorts of assumptions/misconceptions about Apple.
HEIF/HEIC is based on H.265, so not Apple-only as Android supports it. (Recent Sony, Canon, Nikon, etc cameras all support the format as well.)
> Nearly 90 percent of truck buyers said they never use their truck for business towing, as a mobile office, or as a work site. Yet nearly 40 percent said they drive their truck strictly for pleasure at least once a week.
And these are self-reported numbers: what people say about their own behaviour(s).
> Big trucks can be a necessity depending on what you do for a living/your way of life.
For something like ~90% of pick-up owners that is grocery shopping and errands. As one headline put it, most folks don't need a pick-up truck but rather a cowboy costume:
> But, as it turns out, a significant portion of truck owners never use their trucks for these capabilities. According to Edwards’ data, 75 percent of truck owners use their truck for towing one time a year or less (meaning, never). Nearly 70 percent of truck owners go off-road one time a year or less. And a full 35 percent of truck owners use their truck for hauling—putting something in the bed, its ostensible raison d’être—once a year or less.
People would do better to buy a more fuel efficient vehicle, and use the money saved to rent a truck (or van) the few times a year they need those specific capabilities. They'd probably save money, and we'd probably have fewer dead people and children as well:
Why does one 'have to be a zealot' to believe this?
reply