ignirtoq

Why would I pronounce something with rules of English that’s not an English word? When I say the word jalapeno, I pronounce the tilde on the n even though in English it’s neither written with the tilde nor written with a letter combination that would produce that sound through standard English spelling.

In relation to English, it’s the “ng” sound in the common “-ing” ending or suffix.

Wikipedia has an entire article on it (of course): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiced_velar_nasal

It’s not disingenuous. There’s multiple definitions of “offline” being used here, and just because some people aren’t using yours doesn’t mean they’re ignorant or arguing in bad faith.

Your definition of “offline” is encompassing just the executable code. So under that definition, sure, it’s offline. But I wouldn’t call an application “offline” if it requires an internet connection for any core feature of the application. And I call saving my document a core feature of a word processor. Since I wouldn’t call it “offline” I’m not sure what I would call it, but something closer to “local” or “native” to distinguish it from a cloud based application with a browser or other frontend.

I think you’ve already answered your own question. Trump’s first presidency was very different from his second. And the key difference is his advisors. No one knew how to deal with Trump in his first presidency, and the overarching pattern above the chaos was his close advisors constantly working against him to protect the system.

In the break between his terms, he found people who would follow any of his directives, no matter how stupid or damaging. Or I should say, they found him. Trump is now being manipulated himself by a group of “loyalists” who stand to gain from the exact chaos Trump was thwarted from doing the first time around. These people know enough about how the systems work to be actually dangerous. And now that his advisors are philosophically aligned with him, he’s actually doing what he says he’s going to do. I would argue the 4 years of a Trump reprieve may have been the worst of all possibilities, because it gave Trump and his new in-group time to find each other and prepare.

But most people weren’t paying attention. Many saw Trump in 2024 just like they saw him in 2016; the counterweight, spoiler, outsider set to upset Washington and get real changes happening. They thought Democrats weren’t helping them enough, and so wanted to upset the apple cart and get someone different in the high seat. They weren’t paying close enough attention to see that this time was actually radically different to all elections before, and I saw many, many people dismissing the warnings as “oh everyone claims their opponents are fascists, or are going to destroy the country.”

So it’s a combination of people not paying attention, as usual, and Trump actually changing how he’s doing things this time in the worst way possible.

Amber Hart, the co-founder of a research and advisory firm, the Pulse, that specializes in federal contracting, said it’s simply not possible to create a real-time accounting of contract savings with the data the team has used — as DOGE has promised on its website.

“There’s no way for them to make it possible unless they completely overhaul the way the data is reported — which would be awesome,” she said. “I would absolutely love for them to break that. They’re breaking the wrong things.”

Whether “they’re breaking the wrong things” or “hurting the wrong people,” this is what you get when you vote narcissistic idiots who portray themselves as geniuses with inscrutable knowledge of how to fix things at zero cost. It always, always comes back to hurting the poor and minorities to benefit the wealthy. Or at least hurting the out-groups to benefit the in-group. And you are never in the in-group.

Ctrl+F coup

Nope, still not calling it what it is.

The options from other responses are better (gel, cold shrink tubing), but just for your edification, sand in a box can work as an extremely effective insulator for a short period. So heat up the soldering iron and stick it in a bed of sand in a box to take it in with you. Most of the heat won’t escape the box, but it will spread through the tool, so you’ll definitely want gloves.

I’m sorry, I mostly agree with the sentiment of the article in a feel-good kind of way, but it’s really written like how people claim bullies will get their comeuppance later in life, but then you actually look them up later and they have high paying jobs and wonderful families. There’s no substance here, just a rant.

The author hints at analogous cases in the past of companies firing all of their engineers and then having to scramble to hire them back, but doesn’t actually get into any specifics. Be specific! Talk through those details. Prove to me the historical cases are sufficiently similar to what we’re starting to see now that justifies the claims of the rest of the article.

Cowards.

Think of bad sleep or insufficient sleep like an injury. In ideal conditions your body heals it at a certain rate. You can make it take longer, or you can even make the injury worse, by not taking care of it, but you can’t make it heal faster. And at some point, if you’re consistently not taking care of it, you’ll make part of your injury permanent.

Similarly with sleep, it’s not a bank balance, it’s damage to your body and brain that you need to repair. And you can only repair the damage with good sleep. You have to get good sleep until you feel better, and then you’ll know you have recovered.

And if you consistently get bad sleep for too long (a week or more), your brain and body will be permanently changed. Like a permanent injury, you’ll never fully recover some of the damage. It’s hard to overemphasize how important good sleep is to your short- and long-term health.

That’s not what a vomitorium was for. I understand the sentiment, but let’s not perpetuate a misunderstanding of Roman architecture/history.

Are you sure the answer you’re getting from AI about the weight of ginger is right? Before AI I would trust the answer from a smart speaker. Now I don’t trust anything any AI produces that should be fact-based. (Turning on lights and TV I would trust because I can see the results myself.)

I’m not the person you’re replying to, but I think their point is that the bars don’t scale linearly. The red bar (2014 price) for the McChicken is supposed to represent $1 and the yellow bar (2024 price) ~$3, but the yellow bar is not 3 times the length of the red bar. This means the relative differences between the bar lengths doesn’t match the percent increase number printed above then. This is most egregious comparing relative differences between the McChicken and the Quarter Pounder with Cheese meal: why does a 122% increase look so much worse than the 199% increase?

I suspect the cause of problem is that the small bars were stretched a bit to fit printing the dollar value within then, but if it throws off the visual accuracy of the bars, what’s the point of using bars at all?

As students work through lessons on subjects like math, reading, and science, the AI system will analyze their responses, time spent on tasks, and even emotional cues to optimize the difficulty and presentation of content

This will be a nightmare for any neuro-divergent students, or really any student with atypical learning needs.

I thought they would give some meaningless response and people prodding them for a real reason would get the truth out eventually. But no, they just come out and say it in their first response:

Thanks for the contribution here and appreciate your attention to detail. We have decided to keep as-is… part of that decision is that more and more folks are using AI chat to access guidance and tables don’t always translate well in that context.

Mirror proteins behave much like their natural counterparts, with one important difference: They take much longer to break down. That’s because the natural enzymes that normally degrade proteins have shapes that are adapted for attacking left-handed proteins. They cannot grip mirror proteins and cut them into fragments.

The virtual non-existence of enzymes that can break down right-handed proteins is almost assuredly because their use is vanishingly rare in life on Earth right now. If mirror life did escape the lab and find some way to thrive, normal life would suffer until some normal bacteria happened to mutate and create enzymes that could break it down.

I expect it to be like the Carboniferous period. Trees evolved, and nothing was around that could break down lignin, so they thrived for millions of years and caused devastation to ecosystems of the time. But dead trees represented a lot of untapped raw materials, so eventually other life evolved to break them down.

I would expect the same with mirror life. All else being equal, a few million years of devastation until life evolved ways to fight back. Or humans could dramatically speed that up by genetically engineering normal life (bacteria) with the tools to break down mirror proteins and thus attack mirror cells. It would still be devastating and would completely reshape life on the planet, but it may let humanity squeak through and continue existing.

They didn’t put in the biggest bid. They put in a bid that was a smaller amount of cash bundled with a waiver from the Sandyhook families that were to get a damages payout that they forgo their damages claim.

The third party evaluating the bids decided this was a better deal for Infowars’ creditors, as that meant more of the bankruptcy money would be going to them, so that’s why it was chosen.

It does mention cleaner fuels (with less aerosols), but it also says that only accounts for like 20% of the effect. The greatest impact to decreased low altitude cloud cover is unaccounted for, which may be caused by any number of things including global warming itself. So this may be yet another tipping point for a positive feedback loop that will accelerate warming, which we just witnessed kick off.

Wormholes modeled with mainstream physics are incredibly unstable, to the point that they collapse before even a single particle is able to traverse them. Proposals for ways to stabilize a wormhole rely on models that have not yet been confirmed by experiment. So any answer you get is going to be little more than conjecture, and I don’t think you can get the scientific rigor it sounds like you’re looking for.

It was a joke.