Which is... fine.

How many companies really need better than mediocrity? This is a sincere question. I would argue that for most firms, hiring top tier talent is wasteful and unnecessary. You need somebody paying attention to security, for sure. But does it really matter all that much if your CRUD application suffers from insufficient inheritance, inefficient database design, or shitty code that runs fine but is just bad form?

I know this is distasteful. As somebody with three decades of background, I don't like it. But I'm also pragmatic. And if these apps can be kept running by a couple of average FTEs, well... I don't need the dream team. And yes, I know there are costs associated with these deficiencies. But perfection is more expensive than an ongoing need for operational support.

Obviously once you get past a certain level of complexity and criticality, this outlook fails. But even in a company for whom the truly talented are needed, well... they aren't needed for everything.

If you think that there should not be a government run social media (and there should not be)...

That ALSO means we should not be funding any government media, like PBS or NPR.

If you disagree you have to distinguish what is the difference between social media and other media outlets.

Something that quick won't be from random mutations of coding genes, but it's entirely believable for genes that aren't considered coding but which control coding genes. It would also be believable for epigenetic markers.

So there's quite a few ways you can get extremely rapid change. I'm curious as to which mechanism is used - it might not be either of those I suggested, either.

I didn't see any outrage. If you need to see outrage that desperately, seek help.

Hahahah, reminds me of one bank claiming "Security is our highest priority!"

One small interactive play I attended a while ago was in a SciFi setting where I think we all started off as passengers of some kind... anyway in the briefing they gave us they reminded us all that "Your safety is their 7th highest priority" and never has something felt more real. :-)

I got about four chapters into the first book and gave up. Even the pulp put out by Weisman and Hickman was more interesting. There were a lot of Tolkien knockoffs back in the day, some better, some worse, and Robert Jordan was on the worse side. I struggled through the first season of the show, but it was pretty dire as well.

Now canceling The Expanse, that was sad.

Those who do not watch movies are doomed to live them.

Here we have someone literally making an AI MCP, as if they have never watched TRON!

What about a face is it that needs range information - the "R" in "lidaR"? Do people carry around models of someone else's face

Yes that is exactly how Face ID works, a 3D model of the face scanned with "infrared dots" - not exactly LIDAR, but similar.

However just as important is a big use of the rear LIDAR on phones - range finding for the camera! And 3D modeling a face in particular is precise focus on eyes, really useful in portrait mode.

There is also some use of 3D scanning of objects but I would say that's far less used than the range finding aspect (and the fact it does store a depth map with photos that can be used to apply artificially selective focus).

Tell me, which model of phone do you have which uses LIDAR?

From the link you provided:

The feature was later included in the iPhone 12 Pro lineup and subsequent Pro models.

So all those since I've had several since the 12 (always Pro or Pro Max models).

blinding them seems to fall outside the range of allowable behaviours.

In theory if you laid under a car just after it had driven the heat could kill you. Yet cars still exist.

There are all kinds of things that are allowed because the dangerous conditions are rare. Being close enough to LIDAR to get blinded would be one of them, it does seem pretty obvious to me as you say that if it could blind random passers-by on the street it would get banned... my original post is more worded about the rare case, that you get really close to the LIDAR unit to look at scratches in the cover or whatever, then is it a danger? It still seems like it might be but probably mostly not. I would personally try to be sure it was powered down before I got too close.

I hope not, many phones also use lidar.

That is true and in fact we are asked to stare into them for facial recognition... :-)

However, it seems like the LIDAR on a car would be quite a lot more powerful - the phone LIDAR has to reach just a few feet, I think car LIDAR is out to around 200 meters or more!!! That much more power makes me think looking right into it when really close, would be a bad idea - but I don't think it's powerful enough it would fry your eyes if you were just walking down the street and the car drove past. I was thinking it would be good to know so as not to look at the car up close around the LIDAR area for scratch examination for example until you knew it was off.

Or maybe they have safety features that if someone is close the LIDAR is disabled.

So if a human happened to look right into an active LIDAR unit, would it cause any damage to the eye? Even though it's not in a spectrum we can see, something powerful enough could mess with some parts of the eye.

I honestly don't know, anyone have an idea?

Well, let me see. Much less poison in food, clothing, etc.? Check.

Yes, but the U.S. is finally fixing that, thanks to Trump and RFK.

I imagine you must be pretty glad to see that!

Tap water is drinkable

That's an odd thing to say given that most of the tap water in the U.S. is totally fine. It's not like Mexico or a lot of other third world countries.

Good public transportation? Check.

Is it really better though?

The U.S. has good overall transportation in a lot of cities.

While at first glance Europe seems like they have good public transportation that is better, if you look carefully you'll see that public transpiration is optimized for tourists and so so only ever see the sparkling best of it.

But if you ever try to use public transportation in residential areas in Europe, holy cow is it a crapshoot with the possibility of LOTS of walking.

Less privacy intrusion and consequentially less identity theft?

But at what cost? Europe is the one that made us all have to click the idiotic cookie acceptance form for all web sites, forever.

Privacy is something you can control, there's no need for the draconian measures Europe introduces.

Also because of those measures you are LESS safe in Europe, for instance alternative app stores are allowed.

Health insurance for everybody? Check

But what good is it if you have to wait years for treatment, unless you... pay for extra insurance.

I would never want to live in Europe, it's swirling the drain and looks to be ready to cough up the next Hitler.

Of course this was already known. This is just the high speed camera version of proof. Everybody knows that getting shot in the face is a bad idea, but I still watched a ballistics jelly experiment demonstrating it. They aren't breaking new ground here... but it's still cool. I would call this worth watching.

Why aren't boarding gates USB-C...?

Fascism - yes I say that word - means corporatism. Not in the common modern usage (run by and for the benefit of corporate structures) but Mussolini's fascist corporatism.

It's a novel take on ownership of the means of production. In effect, the owners of the means of production serve the government and bargain for their own interests. The State is the gatekeeper of profits, and claims to speak for the workers while lining its own pockets with offers from vassal owners. But they do precious little for the worker; it's a racket. In return, the government rewards the compliant with its favor ("Pray I don't alter it any further"). The term "totalitarianism," though a more benign form in this case, also has its roots here, because the government is baked and embedded into every aspect and form of industry. DOGE is also "embedding" itself in the government sector to consolidate centralized control there as well. It's all a play to consolidate autocratic rule, so as to gain a fascist autocracy. We have fascism. We have authoritarianism. They're still working at establishing autocracy.

This version of corporatism is literally a defining characteristic of fascism. There is no doubt what kind of government is being run here. All you TDS people can go to hell or read a history book, which is probably hell for y'all anyways. I've been calling this guy "Il Duce" since his first administration. This is classic 1930's-flavored bullshit, and the administration fully understands what it is doing. Mussolini never spoke for "the workers" and neither does Trump.

Now I lay me in my bed,
Darkness won't engulf my head,
I can see by infra-red,
How I hate the night.
-- Marvin the Paranoid Android, aka Douglas Adams,