*you’re

I mean, it’s definitely true.

Engineering has its share of math, it can get fairly complex (in the case of electrical engineering, it’s literally complex), but being engineering it’s often based in practical things. But, pure physics has weird-ass math invented just to deal with the messed up calculations required by quantum mechanics.

If you hate weird-ass math, you’ll hate pure physics as lot more than any engineering discipline.

Engineering has the kind of math that can be plugged into spreadsheets and CFD simulations. It’s the kind of math that might be really complicated, but you can get answers out of it, and those answers can be compared to reality. Physics has the “symbol manipulation” kind of math where you don’t even deal with numbers, other than the occasional 2 or 3 when when something is squared or cubed.

It’s subtle, or it might not be real at all.

AFAIK, nobody has ever proven that those kinds of ads actually work, or at least they haven’t managed to attach a dollar value to the ads. But, everyone is afraid not to do it. Also, to a certain extent, advertising is also a prestige thing: you’re not doing it just for your (potential) customers, but also to flex on your competitors.

It’s also another revenue source.

Old system: Haagen-Dazs pays the store a large slotting fee to be on the shelf of the freezer that’s at about chest height. Ben & Jerry’s pays slightly less to be one shelf higher or lower. Store brands and bulk ice cream go on the lowest shelves or above head height.

New system: Haagen-Dazs and Ben & Jerry’s buy ads to be shown on the freezer door. They aren’t like TV ads, they’re just static displays of the containers of ice cream they want to market, but now instead of poorly lit, possibly ice-encrusted containers of whatever ice cream is currently available, they get to promote whatever ice cream they want you to buy. They probably still also have to pay for slotting fees, though these might be lower if the door is a huge screen.

So, what happens if you resurrect an 80 year old human. If they’re an amputee, they get their limbs back… but is it the limb as it would appear on their 80 year old body? Or, the limb as it was when it disappeared?

Imagine an 80 year old with a 20 year old’s forearm.

Also, how healthy does it make you? Are you as healthy as you were before you died? Or, are you returned to perfect health? Or very good health for your age?

How does it affect dementia? Dementia is eventually fatal, but I don’t think it counts as a mortal wound.

Also, if it closes all mortal wounds, what about non-mortal wounds? Say Bob died by falling off a cliff. He’s resurrected, and he gets back the arm that he lost decades ago. Meanwhile his other arm is completely shattered, but not in a mortal way. The rock that was piercing his chest disappears and his massive chest wound is gone, however he’s still bleeding from a dozen small cuts, none of which are mortal on their own, but taken together will cause him to bleed out in a few minutes.

The typical TV / movie / videogame answer to that is that any foreign objects are pushed out of the body as part of the resurrection. I don’t know how that wold work if you resurrected someone who’s currently locked inside an iron maiden.

How tight are the tendons? If my monk has been doing yoga daily for decades, is he going to be restored as someone with “normal” flexibility?

I’ve been to Thailand. One time I was in a restaurant that catered to tourists, and two of the tourists at a table near me told the waiter they wanted the food to be really spicy, because they weren’t like those other tourists who couldn’t handle the heat. They told the waiter to prepare it like it was for Thai people.

So, the food arrived and they thought it was a joke. They couldn’t manage to down a spoonful of it. So, they called the waiter back and tried to call him on the bullshit by having him try it. The waiter tried it, said “yep, tastes good” or something, and asked if they needed anything else. They sheepishly said no, and he left. I think they just left their food uneaten and left.

Point being, if you really eat spicy food all the time, you develop a certain tolerance. What might seem like incredibly spicy food for someone (even someone who likes spicy food) might seem like nothing to someone else. If you’re used to something crazy hot, you need all that capsaicin just to make the dish interesting.

Quantum computers aren’t fast, they’re very slow.

Eventually, if things keep progressing, they’ll be able to do certain things like factoring primes faster than conventional computers. But, the clock rate will probably always be abysmal.

Kindles too. You can jailbreak them and get a shell. They’re so much more useful when they’re jailbroken. They can read multiple other formats, they can get books from a fileserver on your local network, the jailbroken reader app is better, etc.

Yeah, it used to be just web servers in a data center. Bigger systems used mainframes. Consumer electronics used custom RTOSes or other custom boards. Now it’s everywhere. It’s used in the biggest systems, like the computers that power virtually every Google product, and the smallest systems. It’s almost not worth it not to use Linux when building a tiny device because it makes the dev cycle so much shorter.

Google

Their defense will be that they need to merge to be able to compete against Disney. The sad thing is they’re probably right. Even post merger their market cap will be less than 1/4 of Disney’s market cap.

Really, we need to destroy Disney.

They do have balls for the first time in a while, but it’s not just on them. The FTC sued to block the Microsoft and ActiBlizz merger, but the judge sided with MicrosoftActiBlizz.

And yet, a combined Paramount and Warner Bros Discovery would only be a tiny fraction of the size of Disney.

Pawabrodi

Paramount Warner Bros Discovery: Pa Wa Bro Di

But, genetics says that the amount of genes inherited from each parent is fairly random.

75% horse might instead have a horse head, a horse torso, but human arms coming out of its overly thick horse neck.

It seems like yet another example of Google making bad business decisions.

Sometimes, those bad decisions can be traced back to people wanting to “show impact” so that they can get promoted. That’s often why they do something ridiculous like launch yet another chat app, which they end up killing a few years later.

In this case, it could be something like that (like someone has an objective to reduce the number of people using ad blockers from X% to Y% and will hit that target no matter how much it fucks things up). Or, it could just be that Google has some kind of weird strategic goal in mind that they’re willing to burn many bridges to hit.

What’s interesting to me is the role antitrust is playing in this. I’m guessing that a lot of the things they’d like to do are things they feel they can’t do because it will get the attention of antitrust regulators. Like, they could just start perma-banning people based on cookies and IP addresses, but people might raise a real stink about that. So, instead, they’re going with just trying to annoy people enough that they give up and turn off their ad blockers.

They don’t have a 100% monopoly, but they have enough control over the digital video space that they have real competitors.

In a real competitive landscape, YouTube would be scared to do many of the user-unfriendly things they’ve been doing because it would seriously hurt their market share. As it is, they might go from 97.64% of online user-generated video to 96%. That’s not really going to worry them.