If only for her being a singer, I don't see how she _wouldn't_ be a musician

I don't think that's true. I find that it way, way over-intensifies: eg using "load-bearing" for something that's just "kind of necessary although we probably could find a way without it". My personal gripe is how easily it uses "incredibly" or "wildly": just today it was telling me that something is "incredibly cheap" to mean that it's not over-priced ("cheap" would have been okay and even then, barely)

This HN thing of casually using acronyms without defining them is baffling to me

Your statement actually makes the way out of the spiral very explicit: Trump must stop being in power.

Who else than Cloudflare (or similar company in expertise and size) would be a better fit to implement distributed consensus?

It's just an article from a company about their industry, companies do that all the time for brand recognition, building trust (showing expertise in their domain), and educating potential customers about why they might need this sort of product (lead generation).

This is quickly changing though: my subjective take is that the US antagonism is pushing people away from American product AND making the European identity stronger.

Consider this:

    - People are struggling more and more financially, with income that does not keep up with inflation
    - People are seeing inequality rise with the ultra-rich getting ultra-richer
    - People are seeing climate change quickly changing their environment for the worst: droughts, heatwaves, storms...
    - People are expecting climate change to make their financial prospect worse, too

And they see their own government encouraging and subsidising these projects, how could they not feel betrayed?

> People want to enjoy the benefits of progress and data centers while still being loudly “moral”.

I don't think so. People would rather these benefits weren't there, but people exist in society and balance principle with practicality. You're allowed to criticise how AI is being brought into society while also using AI yourself, moral purity isn't a requirement to having opinions.

Not even close to being true!

- There's not been any real convention for most of the history of western music (and no tuning fork anyway) and pitch varied hugely between regions, people and time. Different musician groups in the same church would likely be on different pitches. 415Hz is often used for baroque music but that's just a modern convention, there was no such standard in baroque times. - 432Hz was somewhat conventional at the end of the 1800s, start of 1900s - 440Hz is the "official" standard since then - Many orchestras are tuning to 442, 443, or even 445Hz nowadays

So there's not been any such thing as hundreds of years of tradition, and even now that we do have standards (and ways to measure frequency precisely), pitch inflation continues to be a thing.

Someone shared this recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwRSS7jeo5s I struggle to conceive being able to hear the difference, but _singing_ it entirely blows my mind

well that's the whole question isn't it? If you know how an open string is supposed to have, that's what people call absolute pitch?

I've worked at a company whose product involved some decently advanced computer vision, marketed as AI (which isn't incorrect).

I've also seen companies that were doing machine learning before the LLM boom, who remarketed their machine-learning-based product as AI (which isn't incorrect).