CPLX

14 ms·

271.
by CPLX 11mo ago
Genuine question. What do you think the alternative is? Let's say for argument's sake, that it was relatively well known that you could just drive away rapidly from a police encounter and successfully escape. Do you think that wou
272.
by CPLX 11mo ago
How about the 600,000 packages daily from just Shein and Temu alone? This isn't even remotely confusing to anyone who's bothered to look at it. I assume you haven't done that, because you said this: > It was only exploit
273.
by CPLX 11mo ago
> If the USA bans Bitcoin there will be a massive brain drain of very intelligent people who will just move to those countries. Is that really possible? Can we do this today?
274.
by CPLX 11mo ago
No. It's like saying that cash is risky when a bunch of cash gets stolen or lost.
275.
by CPLX 11mo ago
I'm not sure if you understand what the de minimis exception was. That's just factually incorrect. Literally billions of dollars were getting through because they were being shipped one at a time to fulfill e-commerce type orders,
276.
by CPLX 11mo ago
> America had no idea how good they had it, in the before times. The de minimis exception was absolutely insane. It was a full-blown loophole that caused tens of billions of dollars in goods to come through the border almost completely u
277.
by CPLX 11mo ago
This article seems fine, but I would say that physical acts are really the core go-to for this. Things like running a marathon or Zen meditation. There's nothing that helps you endure smaller unpleasant things more directly than just a
278.
by CPLX 11mo ago
The problem with this idea is that it's the elite that caused the problem. It's the nerds that turned out to be sociopathic predators. I say this with love - I was one, but maybe this isn't the group that was best suited to d
279.
by CPLX 11mo ago
> The internet will be destroyed as countries the world over seek to impose all of their silly and incompatible laws on it. > I'm happy to have known the true internet. Truly one of the wonders of humanity. I'm old enough to
280.
by CPLX 11mo ago
Come to the dark side.
281.
by CPLX 11mo ago
I don't drive on the shoulder as a way of getting around people. However, if I was behind someone who had gone all the way to the end of an exit lane but then was trying to cut back in to the regular flow of traffic, and I was in a car
282.
by CPLX 11mo ago
No, I don't think it's because you're in a taxi. I think everybody should try to cut to the front of the line. That's what everybody does in New York, and it works pretty well. It's pretty easy to understand what&#x
283.
by CPLX 11mo ago
I'm sure it is in places that are dominated by strip malls and tract housing. Here in New York City, we have a different approach altogether. I find it much simpler and more straightforward and easy to understand. You always know exact
284.
by CPLX 11mo ago
Perhaps. But if you have a taxi or car service driver who's not willing to ever break any traffic laws in New York, you will not arrive at your destination in anything approaching a reasonable amount of time. For example, getting at th
285.
by CPLX 11mo ago
I mean, if you define "easier" as "less likely to involve death," then freeways are not easier. And I'm pretty sure that's a good way to define "easier" for something like this.
286.
by CPLX 11mo ago
Oh my sweet summer child. I've got news for you about how dysfunctional New York City transit planning has been and the status of transit to our three giant airports.
287.
by CPLX 11mo ago
You may want to become aware of the existence of New York City. It's a pretty interesting place.
288.
by CPLX 11mo ago
> If you believe that companies create value, then you should believe that companies should communicate with governments Sorry, you're going to have to prove that. Companies are made up of people, and it's completely reasonable
289.
by CPLX 11mo ago
That's really not accurate. Yes, that is a thing that also happened, but that's not why Spirit Aerosystems existed, which is what I'm talking about. It's because Wall Street demands returns on capital in a way that&#x2
290.
by CPLX 11mo ago
I have. I don’t hate it, though I don’t think it’s a magic bullet either.
291.
by CPLX 11mo ago
What's wrong with TDD? This is a serious question, not starting an argument.
292.
by CPLX 11mo ago
I don’t think the problems Airbus have had are comparable to the likely criminal, and clearly negligent, meltdown that Boeing has had.
293.
by CPLX 11mo ago
The problems with Boeing aren’t generic. They’re created by people, and policies. https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/its-time-to-nationalize-a...
294.
by CPLX 11mo ago
This really isn't an accurate description of what happened. In fact, the contrast between Boeing and Airbus is instructive. Boeing is exactly what happens in the event of unregulated capitalism, which is endless mergers and attempts to
295.
by CPLX 11mo ago
I would say it does not, in fact, look like a compressor stall. It looks very much like an uncontained disassembly, presumably from fan blades that suffered a catastrophic failure and broke up in a way that exceeded the limits of the engine
296.
by CPLX 11mo ago
Altman isn’t the only beneficiary, my analogy is just that, an analogy. The property of a charity is being pillaged for the benefit of private parties, like Microsoft, existing employees, and yes of course Altman himself via various means.
297.
by CPLX 11mo ago
Here’s an analogy that might help: Imagine if an executive was running the world’s largest charity for cancer research, which was chartered to make sure a cure remained in the public trust and raised millions with that promise. But then onc
298.
by CPLX 11mo ago
Exactly, everything old is new again. This was one of the drivers of the original dot-com bubble.
299.
by CPLX 11mo ago
It goes back way way further than that. The special mix of government funded technology, ruthless entrepreneurship, and social engineering predates Shockley by almost 100 years. Start by figuring out who Leland Stanford is and how he got ri
300.
by CPLX 1y ago
This is actually my theory of the future. Basically, the ability to multiply your own effectiveness is now directly dependent on your ability to express ideas in simple plain English very quickly and precisely. I’m attracted to this theory

More ›