> AI is in fact the grim reaper for the median coder.

Is it? You don't think the median coder can use these AI tools? In my experience they're incredibly simple to use.

Completely different style and purpose of resting. The long hot rest is for fat and collagen rendering. Nothing like this kind of rest after high temperature grilling or roasting.

Does this at a minimum set a market value for the attempt to move to for profit? IIRC the new for profit will have to buy the assets of the not for profit at fair market value?

Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

I think the point being made is that it seems plausible that a term used in Britain to refer to literal boys was repurposed later in a different context to be a demeaning way to refer to an adult man working with cattle in the US.

> There is no way those non-physical thoughts are changing the physical processes; they happen after the fact. We have the illusion of being in the driver seat but really we are just along for the ride.

How can you conclude this with any certainty?

PBS: Your Brain: Perception Deception

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU6LfXNeQM4

PBS: Your Brain: Who's in Control?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ6VOOd73MA

Rationalization is mostly post ad hoc.

There are other interpretations of some of these experiments (e.g. regarding the action potential). In his book on free will, Mark Balaguer elaborates a little bit. I don't remember the details well, but I'll try to sketch what I think he says.

First, in my recollection, Balaguer points out the form of the argument as follows.

Given that: (1) a particular study shows that one's (perception of when they decided to act) _lags_ the (experimental measurement of the person's action potential spiking), what can we validly conclude?

Some people then claim that (2) claims of making a decision are merely post-hoc rationalizations. I get the sense that such a view is widely held among those who have heard of the experiments -- or at least the popular characterizations of them.

Balaguer says e.g. "not so fast". He points out that we need to talk about the logically necessary steps to reason from (1) to (2). He has a section on this; he claims it isn't as watertight as some think.

As I recall, part of the discussion has to do with motor planning.

Another part is this: there could be a volitional choice that precedes and causes both the action potential spike _and_ the perception/recognition. That volitional choice is unavailable to conscious awareness until some time later, presumably. If true, a person could have made the choice, noticed it later, and still be consistent with the experimental findings.

Apologies for the hazy recollection. I recall not being strongly convinced, partly because I wasn't impressed by the book overall, but I also haven't dug into these topics as much as I would like.

Lucky for us, the issue of latency between action and perception is squarely in the wheelhouse of distributed systems engineers!

Girls don’t like boys girls like beards and money?

Boys will laugh at girls when they read this study?

My school got one (in Malaysia). It was the first computer I ever used. Typing BASIC programs in from magazines and saving them out to cassette tape. Good times. It felt magical.

Unless you have a way to drip feed chlorine into your pool it absolutely will not have the same chlorine level, unless you are running your sag incorrectly.

Automatic chlorine dispensers are fairly inexpensive (and certainly cheaper than a chlorine generator). There's very little reason to manually add chlorine yourself unless you're SLAMing the pool (shock level and maintain, if you're unfamiliar with TFP).

I own these. The experience using them is substantially better than using grocery store clippers. The cutting edges meet very precisely and firmly so I get a very clean cut with relatively low pressure every time. There is very little "give" in the lever, so with my relatively thick nails, there is never a bend as I apply more pressure.