It's been bad for a few years already but it is getting worse. A good chunk of the internet isn't indexing anymore (places which require logins to get the content), and those that are largely exist to earn from the advertising, not to be helpful.

There's actually an opportunity for a disruptive force here. If you can be better at search than Google, you could steal users. But duckduckgo and related are mostly trying to be old Google rather than better Google.

A lot of companies require you to post on LinkedIn regularly for brand building and "presence". Sometimes it's built into your KPIs. So with the advent of AI you just post crap to get it over with. Even if it negatively impacts your personal brand... Game theory stuff I guess.

That reminds me of an essay embedded in Starship Troopers, the novel. Quoting the whole segment:

I found myself mulling over a discussion in our class in History and Moral Philosophy. Mr. Dubois was talking about the disorders that preceded the breakup of the North American republic, back in the 20th century. According to him, there was a time just before they went down the drain when such crimes as murder were as common as dogfights. The Terror had not been just in North America -- Russia and the British Isles had it, too, as well as other places. But it reached its peak in North America shortly before things went to pieces.

"Law-abiding people," Dubois had told us, "hardly dared go into a public park at night. To do so was to risk attack by wolf packs of children, armed with chains, knives, home-made guns, bludgeons ... to be hurt at least, robbed most certainly, injured for life probably -- or even killed. This went on for years, right up to the war between the Russo-Anglo-American Alliance and the Chinese Hegemony. Murder, drug addiction, larceny, assult, and vandalism were commonplace. Nor were parks the only places -- these things happened also on the streets in daylight, on school grounds, even inside school buildings. But parks were so notoriously unsafe that honest people stayed clear of them after dark."

I had tried to imagine such things happening in our schools, I simply couldn't. Nor in our parks. A park was a place for fun, not for getting hurt. As for getting killed in one -- "Mr. Dubois, didn't they have police? Or courts?"

"They had many more police than we have. And more courts. All overworked."

"I guess I don't get it." If a boy in our city had done anything half that bad ... well, he and his father would have been flogged side by side. But such things just didn't happen.

Mr. Dubois then demanded of me, "Define a 'juvenile delinquent.'"

"Uh, one of those kids -- the ones who used to beat up people."

"Wrong."

"Huh? But the book said -- "

"My apologies. Your textbook does so state. But calling a tail a leg does not make the name fit. 'Juvenile delinquent' is a contradiction in terms, one which gives a clue to their problem and their failure to solve it. Have you ever raised a puppy?"

"Yes, sir."

"Did you housebreak him?"

"Err ... yes, sir. Eventually." It was my slowness in this that caused my mother to rule that dogs must stay out of the house.

"Ah, yes. When your puppy made mistakes, were you angry?"

"What? Why, he didn't know any better; he was just a puppy."

"What did you do?"

"Why, I scolded him and rubbed his nose in it and paddled him."

"Surely he could not understand your words?"

"No, but he could tell I was sore at him!"

"But you just said that you were not angry."

Mr. Dubois had an infuriating way of getting a person mixed up, "No, but I had to make him think I was. He had to learn, didn't he?"

"Conceded. But, having made it clear to him that you disapproved, how could you be so cruel as to spank him as well? You said the poor beastie didn't know that he was doing wrong. Yet you inflicted pain. Justify yourself! Or are you a sadist?"

I didn't then know what a sadist was -- but I know pups. "Mr. Dubois, you have to! You scold him so that he knows he's in trouble, you rub his nose in it so that he will know what trouble you mean, you paddle him so that he darn well won't do it again -- and you have to do it right away! It doesn't do a bit of good to punish him later; you'll just confuse him. Even so, he won't learn from one lesson, so you watch and catch him again and paddle him still harder. Pretty soon he learns. But it's a waste of breath just to scold him." Then I added, "I guess you've never raised pups."

"Many. I'm raising a daschund now -- by your methods. Let's get back to those juvenile criminals. The most vicious averaged somewhat younger than you here in this class ...and they often started their lawless careers much younger. Let us never forget that puppy. These children were often caught; police arrested batches each day. Were they scolded? Yes, often scathingly. Were their noses rubbed in it? Rarely. Newspapers and officials usually kept their names secret -- in many places this was the law for criminals under eighteen. Were they spanked? Indeed not! Many had never been spanked even as small children; there was a widespread belief that spanking, or any punishment involving pain, did a child permanent psychic damage."

(I had reflected that my father must never have heard of that theory.)

"Corporal punishment in schools was forbidden by law," he had gone on. "Flogging was lawful as sentence of court only in one small province, Delaware, and there only for a few crimes and was rarely invoked; it was regarded as 'cruel and unusual punishment.'" Dubois had mused aloud, "I do not understand objections to 'cruel and unusual' punishment. While a judge should be benevolent in purpose, his awards should cause the criminal to suffer, else there is no punishment -- and pain is the basic mechanism built into us by millions of years of evolution which safeguards us by warning when something threatens our survival. Why should society refuse to use such a highly perfected survival mecahnism? However, that period was loaded with pre-scientific pseudo-psychological nonsense.

"As for 'unusual,' punishment must be unusual or it serves no purpose." He then pointed his stump at another boy. "What would happen if a puppy were spanked every hour?"

"Uh ... probably drive him crazy!"

"Probably. It certainly will not teach him anything. How long has it been since the principal of this school last had to switch a pupil?"

"Uh, I'm not sure. About two years. The kid that swiped --"

"Never mind. Long enough. It means that such punishment is so unusual as to be significant, to deter, to instruct. Back to these young criminals -- They probably were not spanked as babies; they certainly were not flogged for their crimes. The usual sentence was: for a first offence, a warning -- a scolding, often without trial. After several offenses a sentence of confinement but with sentence suspended and the youngster placed on probation. A boy might be arrested may times and convicted several times before he was punished -- and then it would be merely confinement, with others like him from whom he learned still more criminal habits. If he kept out of major trouble while confined, he could usually evade most of even that mild punishment, be given probation -- 'paroled' in the jargon of the times.

"This incredible sequence could go on for years while his crimes increased in frequency and viciousness, with no punishment whatever save rare dull-but-comfortable confinements. Then suddenly, usually by law on his eighteenth birthday, this so-called 'juvenile delinquent' becomes an adult criminal -- and sometimes wound up in only weeks or months in a death cell awaiting execution for murder."

He had singled me out again. "Suppose you merely scolded your puppy, never punished him, let him go on making messes in the house ... and occasionally locked him up in an outbuilding but soon let him back into the house with a warning not to do it again. Then one day you notice that he is now a grown dog and still not housebroken -- whereupon you whip out a gun and shoot him dead. Comment, please?"

"Why ... that's the craziest way to raise a dog I ever heard of!"

"I agree. Or a child. Whose fault would it be?"

"Uh ... why, mine, I guess."

"Again I agree. But I'm not guessing."

I bet this is a falling out with Hasbro execs on royalties. BG3 royalties were a cash cow this year for Hasbro, pushing Wizards (as a division) to be quite profitable, while almost all other divisions in their company lost money.

So now the agreement is over, and Larian is like: we will own the IP on our next project instead of paying $90M to Hasbro... And fair enough -- they've shown they can kick ass. Hasbro is probably gambling that it's the IP that made the money, and not Larian being magic in a bottle as a developer. So they'll kick tires on selling BG4 to another studio.

BG3 will go down in history as the legendary game before enshittification. Larian will make a few great games that don't sell as well -- before selling out to a whale that dumps money on the owner's front lawn (see also BioWare). The devs who made BG3 will found indie studios and make cool shit for a decade or two. So the wheel turns.

LKML and patch: https://git.kernel.org/...

He cites his work as being a variant of a patch submitted by another developer, Josh Poimboeuf. It's a team effort folks :)

This sounds like the sort of infrastructure project the Linux Foundation should be supporting.

This is a real phenomenon. Men are more attractive when they're already in a relationship.

There are similar psychological effects that exist elsewhere. A job applicant is more attractive if they currently have a job. A scholarship application is more attractive if you list your existing scholarships. The effect is basically: someone else found you desirable, and therefore I must also.

The effect is so strong that it encourages people to fake it to gain the benefits.

My third year thermodynamics course opened with a similar quip by the lecturer. Entropy is actually depressing. You can't fight it. You can't not fight it. It just wins.

Utility corridor. Sometimes a "Right of Way".

Depending on where you live, "hydro lines" or "transmission lines" or similar.

Excellent question. From first principles: mars is about 1.5 AU from the sun. Using the intensity equation (inverse square law), Mars should receive about 1/(1.5x1.5) the amount of solar radiation, or about 44% on average.

Earth gets about 1400 W/m² hitting the top of the atmosphere, but most places on earth only see about 1000 W/m² after the column of air absorbs a bunch of it. Martian air absorbs almost nothing (being very thin), so you'd expect to see about 44% of 1400W/m² -- or about 600W/m².

A quick Google search for "mars solar intensity" shows a result of 590 W/m², so that is pretty close to accurate, from first principles.

So 60% as bright, if talking pure intensity. As you say, the human eye has a pretty responsive dynamic range, and this is quite an acceptable number.

For point of comparison, this is the difference between the sun at high noon versus the sun at 4pm for most of the world. On Mars, high noon would have a solar intensity more like 4pm on earth. No where close to your darkness experience with the eclipse.

Hot take. But put it in the context of the year it was aired, not today. Star Trek (and sci fi in general) was suffering from being perceived as "blue babes and laser guns".

This episode was thoughtful if taken as standalone. And TNG really was about taking the episodes more or less independently. The season long story arcs and such didn't exist. People weren't binge watching. So the world building was less important than the specific hypothetical moral quandary of the week. Like, they are almost like Asimov short stories with a shared cast.

It wasn't until a few years later that serialized TV even really became a thing -- Twin Peaks probably was the first here, but Babylon 5 would have a good claim (and DS9, Buffy, and others were coming together then too). So the style of storytelling on TNG S2 is different.

Divorce the story from Star Trek and the setting and evaluate it as a sci fi ethical quandary. And in that framework, it is a remarkable episode.

Also, Brent Spiner played it well :)

Okay, just back of the envelope math. Assuming the car is truly 550nm, so the blue car is 400nm, and the red car is 700nm... How fast is the car going?

Napkin math says 0.27c.

Δλ=λ(V/c)

Now someone else can figure out the kinetic energy of the car and why the whole continent just exploded...

When fascists say they're going to do something, it's probably a good idea to believe them. When they say they won't do something, they'll probably do that too.

When I was part of the KDE marketing working group, we always talked about 5% being the magic number. If we hit that, then the avalanche of ported and supported third party software starts. It's a weird chicken and egg thing. Looks like we're close!

Complete tangent, but alumina, aka aluminum oxide, is usually considered the second hardest naturally occurring material. When it is found in nature, it is given the mineral name corundum and is clear. But if there are some impurities in it, you can get colours. Red corundum is called Ruby, and blue is called Sapphire. In the beauty industry, the same material (mixed with magnetite) is called emery, and lends its name to emery board, and is used in nail files. In the tech industry, it's used to make the extremely scratch resistant coating on most modern phone screens (basically nothing but diamond will scratch it).

You have subscribed to alumina facts. I'm sorry, the cat facts guy was busy.

This is really strange that there is no master switch. Are you sure this isn't a sub-panel which is wired into another breaker box somewhere else in the building? I'd go hunting, following the main wire.

There's less than half of the number of breakers on here that I'd expect in a house.

Awww. What a cute pet that cat has.

This is like some sort of black mirror ad

Good for gaming, good for linux, good for a lot of the other open source projects involved. It's so close to being critical mass :)

I'm Canadian and cannot vote in the US election, even though it'll affect us a lot (when a sleeping elephant rolls over...)

However, it drives me nuts looking at US polls. Harris is ahead by 2.4 points on average, which translates to something like 5-6 million in popular vote. But due to the electoral college system, it's still a tossup! 538 is running monte carlo simulations based on state-specific polling and margins of error, and Harris is only winning ~54% of the time. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...

So I say this kindly, as your northern neighbour, please please go vote :D

We will likely have our own election in 2025 complete with buffoonery.