Hilarious.

I'd rather deal with a dog over most kids at the mall any day.

I would love to hear your explanation for why you think that statement is an invocation of "no true Scotsman" of all things. Are you sure you know what that means?

Your customers, potential competitors, and even hyperscalers are all possibly the same people at different points. AGPL works because corporate lawyers are horrified by it, not because it actually discriminates against hyperscalers. If you find something that even sane lawyers wouldn't tolerate, then you have greatly limited the benefits of being open source in the first place. If you make a license that actually discriminates on user or use case, then it's not open source.

If you want to protect your project from being resold by potential competitors, do not release it as open source.

I think this problem might solve itself, though. Slowly but surely, companies and power users have become very wary of VC funded companies making big promises and big open source releases, with the knowledge that there is rarely a plan for sustainability and that there is a good chance if they stand on that rug it could be pulled later. Soon, if trends continue, the advantages that you once got from announcing something as open source will start to evaporate and turn into a liability as people start seeing ahead to the eventual "but of course we have to be able to monetize this eventually" stage.

The way I see it, a project can always be open sourced later on once there's a way to do it and ensure the company can remain sustainable. For the flagship product of a company, especially a VC-funded company, not starting open source is the ethical thing to do.

I am pretty sure uncouplers will make a come back. Just something a little more targeted and safer than good ol’ DNP

> The body is a marvelous machine, but it is far from a perfect or intelligent design.

And I think that we can only expect the process of evolution through natural selection to operate on traits that cause differential survival of individuals before reproduction. All sorts of new traits acquired through random mutation and recombination that only affect individuals after typical reproductive years will exist even while natural selection is still operating. The answer to “why doesn’t the human body operate like [some idealized state]?” Is either 1) insufficient time has elapsed to allow natural selection to change the gene pool, or 2) It doesn’t affect survival before or during reproductive years. (Or, I suppose a third explanation is that the required mutation that drives the change just hasn’t happened yet. Our species hasn’t been around that long after all!)

It doesn't seem like that would work since all you're doing is locating "I don't know" in proximity to arbitrary locations in the embedding matrix, not actually with respect to the unbounded set of things that don't exist within it.

Why not have the food grow in your stomach. Direct consumption. Put the LED there too.

people call buying a house to live in an investment but that's because they don't know the technical term is a "hedge"

so you know: most localities do treat the house you live in very differently from a tax perspective than they do any additional properties you might have, because everyone is born short housing, until they own 1 place to live.

so yes, the proposed bailouts up thread would be for people who bought a house because they didn't want to be short housing; a hedge, not an investment.

also if the house has hedges then your hedges are a hedge. I'll see myself out