some knowledge is likely "cached" in the plumber. maybe he doesn't ask the same question twice. i'm sympathetic to the plumber, but i think your concerns of erosion of knowledge or skill are worth pushing on further.

her plumber offloaded to chatgpt.

"i just think it's good for humans to know how to do stuff."

are we talking about your sister or her plumber?

This rhymes. Recently, I took my iPhone 16 Pro in to swap out the screen (there was an ever growing dead spot, and they handled it free of charge). Unfortunately, the screen they replaced it with is much more fragile – hairline fractures within days. I know the replacement screen is of lesser structural quality, but I can't prove it. I've had iPhones since the day they debuted in 2007(?), and this moment connected the dots across years of screen replacements. The original is always much more durable.

But again, sadly I can't prove it.

to that end, while i find beauty in dioxus, i've been more willy to play with expo.

if we're not talking about replicas, we're talking about coordination at the app level, right?

there are volleys back and forth of "what censorship" followed by links to wikipedia enumerating it. RT and Joe Rogan are thrown in the mix.

when did this experiment fail?

now, historically, i'd look at the language choice and ask myself, "would i want to set up a JVM" to run this kotlin app? oh, it's kotlin and python and the installation happens through pipenv?

two different ideas strike me now:

1. would it be worth throwing this at an LLM and having it write it in a different language,

2. if i was just consuming a bundled binary (e.g. go or rust), would i have such reluctance?

i think distribution is becoming increasingly important, making nonsense details like pipenv and whichever version of the JVM is present much greater friction.

Which sources would I trust? I feel it's important to read broadly, and (on a long scale) improve your ability to discount biases. To that end, I'm not recommending anything, but everything in proportion.

> Isn't this literally economics 101? How did we ever even end up imagining that tariffs are somehow paid by the exporter??

My response was that it's not binary, but a mixed case. And, furthermore, from the perspective of an individual exporter, their export profile may change if goods and services are purchased from a different exporter.

E.g. if the same good may be cheaper without a 25% tariff, then you'd expect the incentive to pay less to have some effect.

The US Treasury would still get money, but the exporting country might change.

> "Foreign exporters absorb only about 4% of the tariff burden-the remaining 96% is passed through to US buyers."

so yeah, the exporter does pay some burden. it's not binary. indeed, tariff exports can be designed in a way to dial either direction. certainly, we could dial foreign exporters burden to 0% – and we could dial it back up to 4% (where we're currently at). but, 4% likely isn't a hard ceiling, either. Of course, the 4% number is an aggregate, not the blanket value across indidual goods (or services).

finally, the effect of tariffs is argued to be wealth transfer to the US Treasury. this is worth thinking harder about. but also, exports may change from whom goods are purchased. thus, it's a diplomatic policy, as well.