It's focused on the very poorest, who are not the mode. (Income distribution is approximately lognormal; see https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-lognormal-distributi...).

Say you have 10 people: one making $800/year, 8 making $80k/year, and one evil billionaire making $800 million. Their times to earn $1 are respectively 10 hours, 0.1 hours, and essentially zero. If you take the arithmetic mean of that you get 1.09 hours, and that's dominated by the single poor person. If you double that person's income to $1600, then they're at 5 hours to earn $1, and the overall average is nearly cut in half to 0.58. Meanwhile you can reduce the income of all the middle class people to $40k and not much changes; the average time to $1 would be (5+8(0.2)+0)/10=0.66.

It captures the income distribution much better than average income.

Not really, and certainly not better than median income which is what people typically use. It tries to measure exactly how little income the very poor make, which is not normally what people mean when they talk about inequality or poverty, and also hard to measure at the accuracy that you need when small changes produce huge swings in the result. In particular I don't believe he's correctly accounted for government benefits; hardly anyone in the US is consuming less than $8000/year.

Or sell it, which is much easier to do with Macs because they're known quantities and not "Acer Onyx X321 Q-series Ultra".

There is then the software issue, with Apple devices you are forced to use macOS that kind of sucks, especially for a server usage

That's a fair point. Apple would get a ton of goodwill if they released enough documentation to let Asahi keep up with new hardware. I can't imagine it would harm their ecosystem; the people who would actually run Linux are either not using Macs at all, or users like me who treat them as Unix workstations and ignore their lock-in attempts.

Why did Lia Thomas go from being nowhere near winning in the male division to getting fifth in the women's?

When competitive fairness is raised as an argument for segregation, it is pretextual

If sports were not sex-segregated, most events would never be won by a woman. How is that a pretext?

This has been well studied. Requiring two stairways significantly increases costs, constrains layouts, and is not actually safer: https://www.pew.org/-/media/assets/2025/05/single-stair_repo...

So there were a bunch of people who wanted to live there and now can.

Yes. Or at the very least, stop making it mandatory. Health insurance should work like literally everything else: your employer pays you money, and you use that money to buy it.

Would travel agents have been justified in destroying the Internet so that people couldn't use Expedia?

Right, which is the point: LLMs are much more like human coworkers than compilers in terms of how you interact with them. Nobody would say that there's no point to working with other people because you can't predict their behavior exactly.

I'm happy to see many Democrats now supporting free trade, but that's traditionally been a conservative position.

terminally online young adults who are bitter that they can't afford to live precisely where they like

More accurately: they would like to live in a particular location, the owner of that location would like to sell or rent it to them, but a third party wants to forcibly prevent that transaction.

Yeah, kids these days just include stdio.h and start printing stuff, no understanding of register allocation or hardware addressing modes. 20 years from now nobody will know how to write an operating system.

Also some layer of arrogance

As compared to "if you claim AI is useful for you, you're either delusional or a shill"? The difference is that the pro-AI side can accept that any specific case it may not work well, while detractors have to make the increasingly untenable argument that it's never useful.

To the extent that it has the effect of transferring some properties from rentals to sales, it's only better for the renter who wants to buy and who just barely wasn't able to. It's worse for renters who either don't want to buy or who still can't afford it, because rents will increase due to reduced supply.