They fact-checked constantly during the first half, which was a huge improvement over former debates. Honestly I thought this was better moderated than any previous debate involving Trump.

Harris campaign requested unmuted mics - it was Trump’s team that was worried about him making an ass of himself with interruptions. With that in mind they might be letting him talk because it’s what Harris wanted in the first place.

A lot of people are doing work that can be automated in part by AI, and there’s a good chance that they’ll lose their jobs in the next few years if they can’t figure out how to incorporate it into their workflow. Some people are indeed out of the workforce or in industries that are safe from AI, but that doesn’t invalidate the hype for the rest of us.

This is like saying that automobiles are overhyped because they can’t drive themselves. When I code up a new algorithm at work, I’m spending an hour or two whiteboarding my ideas, then the rest of the day coding it up. AI can’t design the algorithm for me, but if I can describe it in English, it can do the tedious work of writing the code. If you’re just using AI as a Google replacement, you’re missing the bigger picture.

This sounded outrageous so I checked their website: https://www.haciendacdc.org/news-updates/statement-from-hacienda-community-development-corp-ceo-1

Supposedly you need 2/5 criteria to be eligible, and only one of those includes citizenship, so American citizens do qualify if they meet 2/4.

My understanding is that there was no hard evidence and the witness did not wish to testify, so this was a plea deal to make him confess and give the victim closure. Still feels wrong given that he did confess, but if the alternative was no probation I guess this is better than nothing.

I feel like we’re saying the same thing. Your argument (and mine) is that it’s hard for people to understand ADHD unless they have it. For this reason, people like me should keep their mouth shut about it, and if this weren’t an “unpopular opinion” thread I normally would. But for the same reason, I feel that people who haven’t had a proper diagnosis should be cautious about assuming that they do have ADHD, because maybe they don’t understand it either. If I didn’t follow my own advice, I might join the self-diagnosed crowd and start sharing personal coping strategies, and if it turns out I don’t have ADHD, those comments could be ignorant, offensive, or even harmful.

I suppose I’m arguing that ADHD is an extreme of something that most people experience to a lesser degree all the time. Many will relate to these memes and assume that they have ADHD, not recognizing that these can also be normal behaviors. Kind of like how you can be sad without being clinically depressed. I think I’m an asshole for suggesting that there are people who will blame ADHD for behaviors that they are more in control of than they realize - for suggesting that ADHD is a medical condition and not merely a club that one can invite themselves into because they relate to a meme. Any sort of gatekeeping is assholish I suppose, but respectfully, that’s how it looks to me.

I feel like an asshole for saying this but I tend to agree. I relate to every meme/post about ADHD I’ve ever seen, and most people I know do as well, so either we all have ADHD or, more likely, it’s being misrepresented.

The way I see it a day might come when I have to explain to my kids what I did to try to make a better future for them. I could tell them I worked hard to put a roof over their head. I could tell them I changed my lifestyle to try to reduce my carbon footprint. If Trump wins I expect they’ll want to know what I did about that. I don’t have time to volunteer, but if $100 can help pay for an ad in a swing state and win Harris half a vote, that’s better than nothing. Then I can tell my kids I tried to protect their access to abortion, tried to slow down climate change, tried to depoliticize the Supreme Court, tried to strengthen our alliance with Europe, and tried to keep hate and bigotry from having a voice in our government.

For thousands of years the ruling class has tolerated the rest of us because they needed us for labor and protection. We’re approaching the first time in human history where this may no longer be the case. If any of us are invited to the AI utopia, I suspect it will only be to worship those who control it. I’m not sure what utility we’ll have to offer beyond that. I doubt they’ll keep us around just to collect UBI checks.

Right on. AI feels like a looming paradigm shift in our field that we can either scoff at for its flaws or start learning how to exploit for our benefit. As long as it ends up boosting productivity it’s probably something we’re going to have to learn to work with for job security.

• Cloud providers have financial incentive to push microservice architectures
• Cloud providers give corporate consultants statistics like “microservice architectures are proven to be X% more likely to succeed than monolithic architectures”
• Cloud providers offer subscription-based tools and seminars to help companies transition to microservice architectures
• Companies invest in these tools and seminars and mandate that all new projects adopt microservice architectures

This is how it went down with Agile at my company 10 years ago, and some process certifications and database technologies before that. Based on what I’m hearing from upper management microservice are probably next.

From my perspective the corporate obsession with microservices is a natural evolution from their ongoing obsession with Agile. One of the biggest consequences of Agile adoption I’ve seen has been the expectation of working prototypes within the first few months of development, even for large projects. For architects this could mean honing in on solutions in weeks that we would have had months to settle on in the past. Microservices are attractive in this context because they buy us flexibility without holding up development. Once we’ve identified the services that we’ll need, we can get scrum teams off and running on those services while working alongside them to figure out how they all fit together. Few other architectures give us that kind of flexibility.

All this is to say that if your current silver bullet introduces a unique set of problems, you shouldn’t be surprised if the solutions to those problems start to also look like silver bullets.

Jamie Foxx in Django Unchained. I don’t know if I can articulate exactly why he felt miscast, but every time they had a less recognizable actor on the screen I couldn’t help but wonder how they would look in the leading role, and every time I found myself wishing I was watching that movie instead.

Even with cloud cover, seeing it at home was something special. I know what it’s supposed to look and sound like at that hour. It wasn’t the same as night - I could still see sunlight on the horizon all around me. I could sense that the wildlife was confused by it - all the birds just flew to the tops of the trees and were trying to make sense of what was happening. The bugs went quiet, and we were all whispering for no apparent reason - it just felt appropriate. The slow descent into darkness was unsettling, especially under cloud cover - it felt like we were under the gaze of a passing giant we could not see. I was surprised by how relieved I felt when the light started to return. It wasn’t what I was expecting but the strangeness of it didn’t disappoint, and I don’t think seeing it away from home would have been quite the same.

I kept hearing this complaint but when I finally watched it there was only one scene where I couldn’t hear the dialogue (when Neil is scoping out the airport bank vault) and it seemed very much intentional. Did you find this to be an issue throughout the entire film?

Came in here to criticize the concept of a smoking ban based on comparisons to prohibition and the “war on drugs” in America, but reading through the article it actually sounds somewhat reasonable. Using regulation to reduce nicotine content sounds fantastic - no one should be forced to smoke if they don’t want to, and making tobacco less addicting might actually help to accomplish that.

Still not a fan of prohibition as a means of addressing health issues, but I suppose it’s different when your country has universal healthcare.

I’ve been trying to wrap my head around the unconditional support that the US has shown to Israel during this crisis. I understand why we must stand with our friends and allies. I understand that Israel has immense strategic value as an “unsinkable aircraft carrier” in the Middle East. I understand our desire to support democracies in the region. I understand that they have a right to defend their people. I understand that our support is necessary to keep things from cascading further out of hand. But what I don’t understand is how we can provide all this support and still have no leverage to ease the suffering of innocent Palestinians. Are we even capable of applying diplomatic pressure on Israel, or has our support become something more akin to an entitlement?

Why would a player drawn to spellcasters prefer weapon attacks over cantrips? I think that’s the question we need to focus on.

Are they having trouble finding spells that fit the theme of their character? If so, maybe they’d benefit from looking at a wider range of source books. You can also remind them that they can “reflavor” their spells to better fit their character.

Is it utility magic that draws them to spellcasters? Are they even choosing offensive spells to begin with? If not, maybe you can help them out with a magic item - something to guarantee that they have access to a spell or two that would benefit the party. You could also shift some of the danger towards non-combat encounters to give their spells more value. For what it’s worth I don’t think there’s anything wrong with utility-focused characters - they just tend not to shine as much in one-shots. Maybe if they knew more about the adventure ahead of time, they could better cater their character to the situations they’re likely to face.

Are they overwhelmed by their character sheet? If so, playing short campaigns starting from level 1 might help to ease them into their class abilities. Spell cards might also be helpful if you’re playing tabletop.