Windows comes with a secret option to turn off updates with group policies, so you don’t need to modify anything or use a script. It works just fine for me. No updates (unless I manually click update).
The option for automatic updates is several layers deep in a nested menu tree, and I don’t fully recall what the path to get there is. But you should be able to find it online.
Dr. Stone. It’s not for everyone, but if you’re into STEM, it’s probably the closest you’ll get to media accurately portraying science and technology.
It also puts into perspective just how much knowledge, expertise, and experience went into basically everything that we take for granted today. Makes you at least a bit hopeful for the future of humanity
Not an expert, but my understanding is that the multiverse (at least, what we today associate as the multiverse) came about due to the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. Basically, quantum physicists had an observation - particles were moving as though they were being pushed by an invisible wave, and they would pick a random position based on that wave when observed.
The most prevalent explanation for this behavior is the Copenhagen interpretation, which states that the particle is the invisible wave, and the wave collapses into a particle when it is measured. But another common interpretation is the many worlds interpretation, which states that the invisible wave is just a statistical probability of where the particle is. And the reason why the particle seems to pick a random point on the wave when observed is actually because the particle creates branching timelines, and we can only observe what happens in our own timelines. Hence, it seems random to us.
I speculate that the idea of multiple parallel timelines, each slightly different, was probably pretty popular with scifi writers, especially since it’s an easy way to portray “what if” scenarios in their stories, and so the concept became popular because of that
I’m not necessarily sure if that can be correct, depending on the definition. If you are defining a disease or disorder as being abnormal, then perhaps it may have a case there. But many diseases and disorders are defined by whether or not a trait disrupts quality of life. A person may be abnormal, but it doesn’t affect how they live. Therefore, no disease. With this definition, many people can be normal
I don’t think it’s true that people don’t care about the Ryzen AI chips. Stupid name for sure, but this is really Strix Point, the laptop chips. What that really implies is that any AMD laptops going forward will not support W10, which will affect quite a large number of people
Any game that isn’t trying to go for realistic graphics. Some off the top of my head:
There are certain careers that can’t be replaced by AI - anything that requires working with your hands will not be replaced by AI unless robots suddenly get invented. But if robots exist, then there’s likely bigger things to worry about than your job.
I would look for non-routine jobs that require a lot of handiwork. Non-routine because it will be hard to replace with general, non-AI automation, and handiwork because AI is currently digital only.
Carpentry, plumbing, engineering, laboratory research, teaching all likely fall into the safe category
Hmm, that’s an interesting question. I’m not an evolutionary biologist but I am a biologist (more specifically, a microbiogist).
The crux of the misunderstanding, I think, is that the definition of what counts as advantageous or “good” has changed over time. Very rapidly, in fact. The reason many diseases are still around today is because many genetic diseases offered a very real advantage in the past. The example that is often given is malaria and sickle cell anemia. Sickle cell anemia gives resistance to malaria, which is why it’s so prevalent in populations that historically have high incidence of malaria.
Natural selection doesn’t improve anything, it just makes animals more fit for their exact, immediate situation. That also means that it is very possible (and in fact, very likely) that the traits that we today associate with health will become disadvantageous in the future.
If we remember that natural selection isn’t trying to push humanity towards any goal, enlightenment, or good health, it becomes easier to acknowledge and accept that we can and should interfere with natural selection
Games, as with all creative media, by default improve over time as people learn what makes something enjoyable. I think people tend to forget that. So I think for older games, you have to keep 2 “ratings” in your head - how was it compared to the games at the time, and how is it compared to games now?
I loved GTA3 when I played it. But that was back then. I’m not sure if I would say the same thing now, comparing it to modern games.
I get that people like to clown on all the remakes and remasters that are coming out, and for the most part, rightly so. But I also think it’s really important to encourage high quality remakes for this exact reason - when a good game ages poorly, it doesn’t feel quite right to just tell new, younger players to deal with it if they want to figure out what the hype is about
I tried looking for it, but all my searches are flooded with articles about this current takedown wave. I did find a forum post talking about it, though, so I know I’m not crazy.
I might try searching again later, in which case I’ll edit this comment.
Also, I know this isn’t really relevant to the question, but the Yuzu team was doing some really shady stuff, even ignoring the development kit usage. For instance, they were collecting telemetry data from all of their users and were using illegally obtained roms to optimize Yuzu, to the point where the Yuzu team was able to get games to work before the game’s official release
So, I agree with your general points, but I think part of the reason Nintendo is so harsh towards Yuzu is because, as far as I’m aware, Yuzu does actually contain proprietary code from Nintendo.
My understanding is that the Yuzu team used a Switch development kit instead of reverse engineering the Switch as they had claimed, so the entire code is essentially tainted because it’s unclear which parts came from the development kit and which parts came from true reverse engineering
Personally a fan of Keychron M3, and it’s pretty cheap too. I’ve heard that the shape is a bit of a crapshoot with regards to comfort when holding, but I’ve personally never had an issue and it’s just been awesome
To be clear, the magic system in this world is essentially technology. There is a set input and a destined output. The MC simply doesn’t care about fighting to learn any advanced fighting spells and just gatling-gun-spams the weakest attack spell until the opponent gets exhausted.
This ends up being brought up later, since a mage who’s sufficiently trained in fighting supposedly has a fair chance of defeating the MC. It’s a bit of a theme throughout the show about juggling the practical fighting applications of magic vs. the mundane but fun uses of magic
There are a group of people - seemingly a large group of people - who believe in some twisted sort of retroactive reinterpretation of their past experiences.
If something ended badly, then clearly everything has always been bad. If something ended well, then everything has always been well. I see it most often with relationships (a breakup means your ex was evil the entire time). But based on this example, clearly it is not limited to just relationships.
It feels oddly reminiscent of bipolar disorder every time I encounter examples of it.
Didn’t expect that, but what a welcome surprise
Really not a fan of Hex (it just cams out way too easily) but Torx is like screwdriver orgasm. Philips just feels like intentionally bad design
Don’t feed the trolls. My rule of thumb is to make a judgement call: is there anything I can say to convince the other person? If the answer is no, then ignore the message
I see… Do you happen to know of any better alternatives for investing?
Out of the loop - what’s wrong with Robinhood?
I can kinda see both ways. I think both systems aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive - I think the old system works more intuitively for pipes with low volumes of fluid, and the new system works more intuitively for pipes that are full or near full.
I hope that the developers can mix the two systems, so that pipes function with the old system when pipes are empty or near empty, and it switches to the new system when pipes are full or near full