It should be considered a universal law of corporate behavior: any information that has theoretical value will eventually be sold.

Even if current management has no intention of exploiting it, they’ll be replaced by the board, or the division and its data will be spun off and sold for its IP—that’s just corporate nature (i.e., the purpose of a system is what it does).

They tried to take down Moby Wick.

So I assume this study was meant to narrow down the previously-established association between gun ownership and household lead levels by focusing on gun storage. But couldn’t it also be the case that lead exposure (from guns) is causing caregivers to store their guns less carefully?

(Or in other words—maybe the danger of elevated household lead due to gun ownership is independent of storage practices; but lead exposure also leads to more dangerous storage practices, which causes the correlation.)

Mark Zuckerberg, probably.

There’s no objective measure for quantifying similarity. We can measure relative similarity, though—but that scale will vary depending on what it’s relative to.

We could measure genetic similarity relative to a typical unrelated person, or relative to the nearest non-human animal, or relative to the most distantly-related living organism, or relative to random noise. (And you can do the same for facial similarity.)

“This code is too dangerous for me to look at, so it must be fine.”

Why not ask them to buy two tickets while they’re at it?

scientists narrowed down a “sweet spot” of between 6.4 and 7.8 hours of sleep per night

If you sleep less than that on weekdays and more on weekends, does it average out?

Seems like the obvious next step would be to combine this with variable layer height to get a continuous range of intermediate tones.

Even if it worked perfectly… isn’t clerking the way future attorneys and judges are supposed to get experience?

So maintain chip volume, but switch production from memory chips to corn chips.

If one is opposed by 53% and the other is opposed by 71%, a title suggesting that either is “popular” is a bit misleading.

I think the group of people spending the majority of their lives communicating online would be the first to insist that people who spend their lives online shouldn’t be put in charge of anything in the real world.

The killer feature is the lack of connection to Meta.

What if the risk of self-harm is a result of using ChatGPT?

RSS feeds seem like the obvious replacement—how is your vibe-coded solution better?

So my proposal would be: votes are only sent to the author of a post. The author then sends an Update activity to their followers and the magazine the post belongs to. […] These properties then contain a Collection with a property called totalItems and not a list of the people who actually voted

What’s to prevent the author from faking upvotes, if the votes themselves aren’t public?

So a chess player that exploits an opponent’s weakness is hacking?
A snake that finds an entrance to a gopher burrow is hacking?

“Finding vulnerabilities” is the kind of dangerously overbroad generalization that gave us the DMCA.

Did he try offering them FIFA Peace Prizes?

At best, B’s bank knows that B had some bills that once passed through your hands. But they have no way of knowing if you actually spent the money at B’s or if there were other transactions in between.