Pelicanen

I think Biden still believes that things can swing back in the midterms or next presidential election. I don’t think he realizes that this might have been the last election that was possible to win.

If he does something drastic, he’d probably hand even more popular support to the Republicans in general and to Trump in particular who would play victims as much as they could.

If he does nothing, it might be the end of democracy, not just in the US but in most of the world. But he will have “accepted defeat gracefully” and considering he won’t live to see the worst of it, I imagine that’s all that matters.

Edit: Just watched his speech. Nope, he thinks this is business as usual.

Not only that but it makes it easier to care about one another, which gives a greater incentive to unionize.

It’s when you stop programming that you start solving problems.

The problem is that the previous accumulation of capital has centralized a lot of power in actors who have a financial incentive to stop renewables. If we could hit a big reset on everything then yes, I think renewables would win, but we’re dealing with a lot of very rich, very powerful people who really want us to keep being dependent on them.

C++ is unironically my favorite language, especially coding in python feels so ambiguous and you need to take care of so many special cases that just wouldn’t even exist in C++.

I think part of it is a fundamental weakness in the Swedish judicial system where you need clear perpetrators and clear victims, meaning that if you have a group of people committing a crime and you can’t prove that they intentionally cooperated to commit the criminal act or who did exactly what, they may go free (exhibit A). The same goes if you can prove the crime but not the victims (exhibit B).

Of course the bar is higher when it comes to the police, they will pull out all the stops to prevent one of their own getting investigated, but this issue runs even deeper.

I have no idea about the statistics about motorcycle fatalities and for personal reasons I’d prefer not to get into them. I was just commenting on the way the statistics were calculated year-by-year with the assumption that the original statistics for fifty years were accurate. That being said, it’s possible that those statistics were not completely correctly calculated as well.

if we divide each of those percentages by 50, we should come up with the odds of dying in a given vehicle per year,

I’m being very nitpicky but this isn’t quite how it works, if you have a 90% chance of survival one year, you’d have 0.9^2 = 0.81= 81% chance of surviving two years in a row. With that in mind, the odds of dying should be relative to the fiftieth root of surviving fifty years, which gives:

• Motorcycle: 0.478%
• Car: 0.151%
• Ferry: 0.065%
• Amtrak: 0.0086%
• Airplane: 0.0014%

Without additional decimals it’s hard to see the change for the really small numbers but it doesn’t make much of a difference in reality.

The thing is, with a certain model you could get a perfect 1:1 copy but that’s not really the point. I have a degree that includes machine learning and I believe it’s imperative that we have legislation that protects content owners and puts restrictions on what data you’re allowed to use to train your models. Not because I don’t understand but because I do understand.

Haphazardly introducing this technology at a large scale in society will come with serious consequences, not to mention the consequences to privacy if we don’t curtail what data that companies are allowed to scrape from the internet just because they throw in buzzwords about “AI” in somewhere.

This is fundamentally not about being pro-technology or anti-technology, it’s about how we value private citizens versus corporations.