I think mplayer has an ASCII output mode (VLC, too?), and I believe youtube-dl can output to stdout.

The rest is, as they say, left as an exercise to the reader.

Ah, good point!

Dell XPS 13 Snapdragon seems like it’s trying to compete with the Air.

TIL, thanks! Edited my earlier comment.

Yeah, the only thing I could imagine would be that image loading/processing uses an optimized library, but a single color is (unlikely but possibly) implemented poorly as a loop over every pixel, with some egregious overhead.

Most likely shit post though… See reply, apparently real!

In my experience, the blue (405nm) lasers pointers can far, far exceed the nominal (5mW?) power.

I’m not mad at the huge amount I pay in taxes. I’m mad about what I get in return.

You can turn it off, at least for ext4: https://lwn.net/Articles/784041/

Although you can use case insensitive filesystems with Linux, and case sensitive filesystems with macOS. I believe the case sensitivity is a function of the specific filesystem — but yeah, practically, the root for Linux is always case sensitive, and APFS ain’t is only if you ask it to be ( https://support.apple.com/lv-lv/guide/disk-utility/dsku19ed921c/mac ).

And over twice the GDP.

“Wow you signed the document in blood, you must be really hardcore.”

“No I’m just cheap.”

That’s…pretty believable.

The amount of money you save (and invest) isn’t accurately depicted with this though. Living expenses don’t necessarily grow with take home, if you keep lifestyle creep to a minimum.

So what this means is that if you make $100k and save $10k/year, if you start making $200k you can save the same $10k/year, plus the entire additional $100k after taxes (let’s just say that’s $50k+). So you doubled your salary but your savings went up 6x+.

Not sure why you’re saying Python forces everything to be object oriented…?

But “included” doesn’t mean free. You still paid for it.

I’m curious how the battery percentage went up

Physicists hate this one weird trick…

Is that true though? As in, is it really that dangerous? It seems that you’ll dissipate power equal to the inefficiency times the nominal charging power, so something like 5V x 2A x inefficiency (inefficiency being 1-efficiency), which will probably be of order a watt.

I can use my car battery to charge itself without any issues — I just plug the red terminal to itself, and same with the black, which is to say, a battery is always connected in a way that “charges itself.”

I think the key is that the battery probably isn’t really playing a big role in OOP’s setup — electricity doesn’t “go through the battery,” it just goes from the charging input to the power output circuits, with the additional power (due to inefficiency) being provided by the battery.

I’m not sure though — the power output and the charging input are both regulated and (almost certainly) current limited. So I think (not positive…) that you’re basically dissipating your power in the inefficiency the charging and output circuits, with this power coming from the battery.

The inefficiency should (I think…) just be the round-trip inefficiency of the charging/discharging of your power bank — this should be way, way less than the short-circuit power dissipation.

The simplest toy model is to take a battery and try to charge itself. So you put jumpers on the + terminal and you connect those to the + terminal, and same for - (charging is + to +, NOT + to -). But this is silly because you’ve just attached a loop of wire to your terminals, which is equivalent to doing nothing. With charging circuits in between things get much more complicated, but I’m not sure if it goes full catastrophic short…

For 75kg (roughly average South Korean male weight) and 7" step height (standard in the US I think, not sure about Korea), this is about 0.13kJ/step.

By coincidence, the human metabolic efficiency is (roughly) the same as the conversion between kJ and food (kilo)calories, meaning this would be (very roughly) 0.1 calories/step.

Not much, given a single French fry is maybe 5-10 calories. But it’s better than nothing!

good enough simulations that you can’t tell the difference.

This requires us having actual conversations with those dead people to compare against, which we obviously can’t do.

There is simply not enough information to train a model on of a dead person to create a comprehensive model of how they would respond in arbitrary conversations. You may be able to train with some depth in their field of expertise, but the whole point is to talk about things which they have no experience with, or at least, things which weren’t known then.

So sure, maybe we get a model that makes you think you’re talking to them, but that’s no different than just having a dream or an acid trip where you’re chatting with Einstein.