PCs have almost never supported CEC. PCs use a different signalling method to indicate to the monitor that they’re on/off.

Is this the one FriendlyJordies was talking about?

That is sort of what sponsored segments are, and what sponsorblock is quite effective at dealing with.

If they’re injected on the fly at variable time points, it gets harder, but I suspect fingerprinting could work well enough.

TVs often do a bad job at switching on when the computer turns on, then off when it turns off/goes to sleep. Drives me spare. That was fixed in like 1995-2000 for normal monitors.

The article seems to be focussing on the “making bad decisions” aspect - i.e. “don’t use it for anything important”.

I wonder if this is also an attempt to limit IP liability in case someone claims that copilot reproduced copyrighted/patented material?

Obviously entertainment is also full of copyrighted material but the payouts aren’t usually quite as big as patent claims.

The Science of Discworld novels are a fun mix of science and wizardry.

Thief of Time is not wizards but underrated Buddhist Time Monks.

The early wizards books didn’t really grow on me as well as the later other books.

Use of Weapons, Look to Windward, Surface Detail, and Hydrogen Sonata are all reasonably sex-filled (if not entirely sex-positive) too.

Definitely hits all the points of Luxury Gay Space Communism.

Most of the current plans for wealth taxes start in the region of $5-$50 million, taxing wealth above that bracket (like other progressive taxes). Do you expect to save $5 million, let alone $50 million? If not, you won’t pay any wealth tax.

Many plans also exclude your ‘family house’ from that, so you could have a $3m house and $4m in the bank and still pay no wealth tax - you’re rich, but not filthy rich.

Most of the seriously proposed tax rates are also in the 1-3% range, maybe 5% on the very high end. Again, of wealth above that threshold.

There is also some argument about hoarding that $200k (again, more like $20m) you saved rather than using it. If you spend it eating out, drinking, getting your house renovated, flying somewhere - then you end up paying tax and spending money and there’s some trickle down. If it sits in a bank account or in stocks or real estate, less so.

One of the big arguments is to tax wealth, not just income.

Cost-to-benefit analysis, sure. But you still need a realistic comparison of the costs side of the equation to do that.

People were whining about the energy costs of regular data centers long before AI came along.

That invites a lot of questions like is it lower carbon to have a zoom call than fly out for a meeting? Do the travel emissions of an imported tomato offset the heating emissions for a local out-of-season hothouse tomato? If I’m going to make one personal sacrifice, is it more effective to give up red meat, bike to work, or make my next holiday less far away?

Intentionally ignoring evidence is just dumb; decisions made purely on vibes are often going to be wrong.

So your alternative is what? Just say a tonne is a tonne?

It’s adequate for the purpose at hand.

Lots and lots of math and analysis.

My understanding is it is fairly well settled on a chemical & lifespan basis. I am not sure of what impact initial altitude has.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential

Anaerobic bacteria produce methane. When oxygen is present, the aerobic pathway outcompetes anaerobic because more energy is available, producing CO2 instead.

GHG are usually measured in tonnes of CO2 equivalent (GWP) where methane is about 80x as much warming as the same mass of CO2 over a 20 year period, or about 25x as much warming over a 100 year period.

This is also what’s going on in the steady replacement of various refrigerants with lower-GWP alternatives.

But all of those are net emissions?

Desire-to-die is potentially a reasonable way to describe 15 hours in an economy airline seat, or stuck in/as traffic.

I.e. so fed up with this that you’d rather be dead.

I feel like the axes need better labeling. Putting the labels on the negative is confusing.

A lot of the emissions from food are not things that are already in the carbon cycle.

• Deforestation to turn forest into farmland.

• Fossil fuels for equipment and to manufacture fertiliser.

• Methane from animals is significantly more potent than if that same carbon was released as CO2.

Pushing up the price of oil and stopping production could actually be carbon negative.

Cycling and rowing machines are probably the only practical options for that - they both have intentional friction brakes to dissipate energy, because they are actually efficient enough to need them.

Treadmills still need to put power in because of the friction, and most weight or spring machines rely on you absorbing the energy you just put in (unless you drop the weights…)

It recognizes Zionism as Israel’s foundational ideology that has created and maintains an apartheid regime between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. It further affirms the right to self-determination and liberation of the Palestinian people and supports

the establishment of a “single democratic Palestinian State in all of historic Palestine, with Jerusalem as its capital.” This effectively would eradicate the State of Israel.

I am not sure these two are fundamentally the same.

“Palestine should exist as a state” does not necessarily imply “Israel should not exist as a state”.