I would not be surprised if rather than continuing to battling it out with the credit card companies to negotiate for lower fees, more and more retailers adapt to the cashless economy by leaning on ACH in lieu of credit cards, especially in market segments where repeat business is common (basically any retailer that has an existing loyalty program).

To put it another way: Sure, litigation is an option, but even if you win the concessions you want, it will leave the credit card companies entrenched. Pushing more customers to pay via non-credit-card methods has the benefit of more immediate financial impact, less reliance on the legal system, and deterioration of the power that led to the anticompetitive behavior in the first place.

But what is the incentive for contractors to participate, and how does it overcome the enormous disincentive of "You are training your replacement"?

My guess is that truly skilled contractors in these trades are not hurting for work. So I doubt they're going to be swayed by just a few more extra jobs added to their docket.

Less skilled contractors who are desperate for work might be taken in, but then the quality of their output is likely to be worse, and the value of that training data is likely to be low.

My guess is that people in skilled trades who are used to working with their hands are going to be even more skeptical than white-collar folks about an AI revolution, and more guarded against change in that direction.

Octane is unlocking the power of financial products for merchants and consumers. Our cutting-edge technology and innovative financial products empower businesses with more control and flexibility, enabling them to deliver seamless digital experiences, drive customer loyalty, and build long-term value.

We are hiring a Senior Software Engineer to build features and infrastructure for our decisioning (automated underwriting) team. Used by dealerships across the country, this product provides a streamlined workflow for dealerships to get fast, flexible financing to their customers. Working with a team of passionate, experienced engineers, you'll work throughout the backend of our stack with technologies such as Python, Django, PostgreSQL.

Apply: https://octane.co/o/who-we-are/careers/jobs-open/?gh_jid=799...

The Everest effect.

George Mallory: "The first question you will ask, and the one I have to answer is, 'What's the point of climbing Mount Everest?' And my answer should be, 'It's no use.' There is not the slightest prospect of any gain. Oh, maybe we can learn a little about the behavior of the human body at height, and medicine can change our observations for aviation purposes. But nothing else could come of it. We will not bring back a little gold or silver or gemstones or coal or iron. We will not find soil or earth that we can grow crops that produce food. There is no point. So if you can't understand that there's something in humans that responds to the challenges of this mountain and goes to meet those challenges, then the struggle that ensues is a struggle from life itself upwards, and you won't see why we're leaving. What we get from this adventure is just joy. We don't live to eat and make money. We eat and make money to enjoy life. That is the meaning of life and the purpose of living."

Why generate all of these papers? Because, for the first time, he can.

Doesn't have to be for the money or fame or potential for speaking engagements. It could simply be that he wants to test the limits of what's possible.

Or at least, it's extremely limiting, compared with hosting it somewhere on the web, which is not that hard to do these days.

Think of the workflow: Any time the state changes, you need to email a new Capsule file to whoever else is using the app. And one would think the state would change at least occasionally, because otherwise there's little reason to use a DB.

Alternatively, you can just host it on the web, the DB state dynamically updates, and it's automatically available to anyone with app access. Isn't that a lot simpler?

It is explicitly not a foreman, task routing, or an orchestrator agent. It has a bias toward direct action and is instructed to only delegate when necessary.

I've found that this approach yields significantly faster results, without much of a quality trade-off, than an agent whose primary impulse is to delegate.

In contrast, HydraFusion starts with a task routing step, then sequential planning, execution, and review stages. My guess is that this workflow is best for people who are prioritizing cost over speed for the same level of quality.

Here is the Virginia code on contributing to the delinquency of a minor: https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title18.2/chapter5/secti...

The only portion that is even remotely relevant is:

> (b) renders a child delinquent, in need of services, in need of supervision, or abused or neglected as defined in § 16.1-228;

However, here is that section: https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/16.1-228/

Paragraph 2 is the relevant one:

> No child whose parent or other person responsible for his care allows the child to engage in independent activities without adult supervision shall for that reason alone be considered to be an abused or neglected child, provided that (a) such independent activities are appropriate based on the child's age, maturity, and physical and mental abilities and (b) such lack of supervision does not constitute conduct that is so grossly negligent as to endanger the health or safety of the child. Such independent activities include traveling to or from school or nearby locations by bicycle or on foot, playing outdoors, or remaining at home for a reasonable period of time.

I would think that in order to justify a conviction, prosecutors would have had to overcome the above by showing evidence that this particular child is INCAPABLE of safely walking to a nearby location within his neighborhood, or that the child ACTUALLY DID put himself in danger, i.e. by entering the pond.

Something tells me that evidence does not exist, and the judge ruled based on something other than a correct reading of the law.

1) benedict.cumberbatch.name

2) drstrange.co.uk

I expect the average person would assume that for the domain 1, .name is the TLD, cumberbatch.name is registered by a private entity, and benedict (and any other subdomains associated with cumberbatch.name) is a subdomain fully controlled by that private entity.

Whereas for domain 2, I think the average person will view ".co.uk" the same way they view ".com", even though technically it is both a ccTLD and a second-level domain.

Whereas with .name, you are choosing what appears to be a subdomain, followed by what appears to be a domain name. But under the hood, you do not own all subdomains for that domain name; you own only the combination of first_name.last_name.name.

Even though .science was launched in 2014 (more than a decade ago), I still consider it a non-standard TLD and still deal regularly with difficulties around its use. (For instance, you wouldn't believe how many online services reject email addresses than end in .science because they use regexes that exclude TLDs with 7 letters.)

Likewise, I've registered .lol and .fun domains but never would have assumed that just because they're available now, they will be available in perpetuity.

In that sense, .name as a third-level TLD is even more non-standard, because the standard way domain registration works is by choosing a single "second level" domain name, then adding subdomains.

It's a pretty bizarre exception to the normal, intuitive ways that domains work.

I'll admit that it's a crappy situation and I would be frustrated in his place. But if I were in his place, I probably would have also thought it prudent to have a backup plan.

Not all space is equally viable. Landfills need to be close enough to populated areas to make waste transportation feasible, while far enough from populated areas to avoid being a blight.

So, sure, you can build a landfill in the very center of the Australian outback, but who's going to use it?

So no, I don't think I have aphantasia.