My bio is rusty but I remember that archaeon are into extreme situations. Is it so weird to find an example of one essentially “offloading” some functionality to its host? Especially in a diluted environment like the oceans
Readit Newsadmin_account commented on Tiny microbe challenges the definition of cellular life nautil.us/a-rogue-new-lif... · Posted by u/jnord
admin_account commented on Greenland is entering an economic crisis naalakkersuisut.gl/Nyhede... · Posted by u/tokai
Death, taxes, and pension liabilities absolutely nuking your financial future. GE, GM, Ford, Greece, and coming to your country soon.
Do you really think EU is not capable of creating similar services?
From a technical standpoint, no. From a cultural standpoint, yes.
Ed Thorp’s Princeton/Newport Partners was the first great quant hedge fund.
Jim Simons/Renaissance were the first great quant hedge fund. For the last 30 years their annualized returns, after fees, is 39%.
admin_account commented on Stockton extends its monthly $500 UBI payment experiment citylab.com/equity/2020/0... · Posted by u/SamWhited
What is the point of UBI studies this small? Giving a few hundred people extra money each month will improve the well being, no question about it.
The issues with UBI only arise when it's done at scale. For example let's say you give every US citizen over 18 a monthly UBI check for $1000. What's stopping prices from rising accordingly? How will the ~$3T yearly UBI bill be paid for?
The question of how is this paid for is my biggest issue with UBI. If someone can give a reasonable answer that doesn't require national price fixing, taxing tech companies on their data, or some version of reshuffling the current budget around, I'll happily change my mind. Until then, for me, UBI is nothing more than an economists wet dream.
admin_account commented on Mozilla’s Fix-the-Internet Incubator builders.mozilla.communit... · Posted by u/SQL2219
They did not always have 5% market share. iOS and Android pushed WebKit/Blink hard, and Mozilla did not quickly respond; the ecosystem has suffered as a result.
That's all true, but overall they've been steadily falling since 2010.
However I disagree with your view of the ecosystem. The web needs stability and consistency more than anything else. FF switching to Chromium would help with that. So many people have this knee jerk reaction of Chromium = Chrome = Google having total control. But don't understand the only reason Google has had this much control over Chromium is because no other major vendor used it. They were the biggest kid on the street. But now that MS moved in a few doors down, that's no longer true. Google has to acknowledge MS in a way they never did with Opera, Vivaldi, Brave, etc.. And the same thing would happen if FF switched to Chromium.
Idk about you, but having 3 of the 4 biggest vendors all being forced to collaborate and implement solutions supported by at least 1 of the others, is 1000000x better than having each do their own thing. You effectively go from a monarchy to some form of democracy.
admin_account commented on Mozilla’s Fix-the-Internet Incubator builders.mozilla.communit... · Posted by u/SQL2219
This probably won't be popular but, does anyone take Mozilla seriously? For me they've always seemed well intentioned, but completely oblivious to reality. For example, does a browser with 5% marketshare really need its own engine? Can a browser with 5% marketshare even change anything if they wanted too?
Personally I don't think so, & also why I don't take them seriously. They seem to be more concerned with waving their "For The People" flag, than actually trying to change anything. If they were serious about "fixing the internet" they'd swallow their pride, transition FF to Chromium, & essentially become something akin to an activist shareholder within Chromium.
Fun speculation: Maybe we started with no crossover (which gives avoidance behaviour, keeping the organism free-swimming). This still works for a while as the axial angle between eyes and muscle groups increases, so there's no real penalty for having a bit of a twist. As the twist increases, it starts acting a bit like a discriminator, where we avoid small things less than large things, which seems good if we want to eat small things. Past 90°, we start spiraling towards things instead of away from them, which admittedly makes us crash into large things more, but we can chase moving things. Hunting has evolved!
The spinal cord handles rapid reflexes (pulling away from a hot stove), leaving the brain for slower non-immediate tasks. By crossing nerves before they reach the brain a standardized delay is introduced, giving the brain a predictable offset to filter against. The optic chiasm follows the same logic.
And I think this is necessary to keep same-side brain-body pairs from over-optimizing (direct nerve connection from the right hand to the right brain hemisphere) their paths at the expense of balance, preserving biological symmetry.