All in the same town. Unlike most street name splits (like West Main / East Main), they're not even connected. Very little chance they'd change street names over this.
I’m not sure how all this can be said with a straight face; that you are “pro-israel” you just think the borders should be set back over 50 years and that a democratically elected government’s actions is worse than those of a terrorist organization.
Not once did you mention what atrocities were committed on Hamas’s side and instead you spent all your effort justifying Hamas by arguing how you think Lukid is worse.
What actions in your opinion would be an appropriate response for people (& government) of Israel to respond to the targeted rape, murder, beheadings of the elderly, men, women, and children, which was filmed by Hamas and sometimes live-streamed on the social media accounts of their victims to show off what they have achieved?
I’m not sure you can claim to be in the middle or support ‘both sides / both peoples’ when you only have bad things to say about one of them.
They did in fact mention what Hamas did - when they said civilian deaths caused by Likud are an order of magnitude higher. Perhaps they think civilian deaths are intrinsically bad, and don’t feel the need to calculate that one beheading is worth 5 children dead for lack of medical care, or whatever the official rate is?
Also, a reminder that Putin and Hamas were also democratically elected, and I don’t see why that has any relevance to whether their actions should be condemned or not.
There have not been elections held in Gaza in 18 years and Putin’s elections are not considered free and fair - see the arrest of Navalny.
Democratic processes are good because it holds those in power accountable for their actions and should not just be hand waved away as if it doesn’t matter.
And no, what Hamas has done was not mentioned, all that was said was ‘the actions of Hamas’. What actions - did they hold a bake sale? It is unclear and minimized.
If you don’t know what Hamas did you are totally out of your depth.
Israel argues that Hamas are the elected leaders of Gaza and that’s why residents there are at fault. I completely agree that Hamas do not represent Palestinians and think Israel should also admit this.
You can argue whether or not Palestinians deserve the response, but what makes you think Hamas does not represent Palestinians? A recent poll by the Arab World for Research and Development shows that 75% of Palestinians support both the October 7th attacks and Hamas's vision of a single, Palestinian-only state. And Hamas's vision to achieve this state is actual, literal genocide.
The Linus Tech Tips video says that it's a commercial product for use in factories where dust and other airborne material mean they can't use fans for cooling (apparently, similar previous products from this company used passive cooling).
However, the marketing images on the product page don't match with this; there's definitely a lot of images of use at home. I'm not sure whether it's a consumer product or not.
For small companies/startups, selling a niche product, direct to consumers is rarely worth the time. You have a small team that should be putting their effort into selling/packaging thousands with each call, not 2. The company lights only stay on if the collective sales goals are met. And, shipping to Joe Shmoe can easily cost money. This is why places like Adafruit exist: direct-to-consumer is a huge pain.
I think if the tech does not get acquired by someone big you probably will never see it come to market in any meaningful way. AirJet should just let people buy these for DIY to start and build hype and start partnering with OEM’s for preconfigured options.
Is it even possible for that to happen? The entity that governs OpenAI is a registered charity with a well defined purpose, it would seem odd for it to be able to just say "Actually, screw our mission let's just sell everything valuable to this for-profit company". A big part of being a 501(c)(3) is being tax exempt, difficult to see the IRS being ok with this. Even if they were the anti-trust implications are huge, difficult to see MS getting this closed without significant risk of anti-trust enforcement.
Yes, a charity can sell assets to a for-profit business. (Now, if there is self-dealing or something that amounts to gifting to a for-profit, that raises potential issues, as might a sale that cannot be rationalized as consistent with being the board's good faith pursuit of the mission of the charity.)
They can sell OpenAI to microsoft for 20 billion, fill the board with spouses and grandparents, then use 10 billion for salaries, 9 for acquisitions and 1 for building OpenAi2.
Mozilla wastes money on investments while ignoring firefox and nobody did anything to the board.
supposedly capped-profit, though if a non-profit can create a for-profit or a capped-profit, I don't see why it couldn't convert a capped-profit to fully for-profit.
This makes the most sense, people would actually get paid for their PIU's. Im confident otherwise they are going to cry looking at what a level 63 data scientist makes at MS
> Adam D’Angelo is working on ChatGPT competitor Poe.
> Helen Toner & Tasha McCauley are working with OpenPhilanthropy/Anthropic on GovAI board (former board member Holden Karnofsky left when his wife started to get involved with Anthropic)
These seem like much larger conflicts of interest (working with direct competitors) than working on a company that one day this company might want to purchase a product from.
The board was anemic, lost people and didn’t replace them, and then was small enough that you could fire the chairman of the board and then remove the CEO in a friday night massacre.
Those conflicts disappear when you look at the OpenAI nonprofit through its aspiration to steward safe AGI no matter where it arises. It’s meant to transcend specific interests and look more like a technocratic standards body, like an IEEE precursor for AI, than a corporation seeking a private edge. It should have representation of diverse interests.
And that’s exactly why its ownership of an apparent VC rocketship in its profit-making entity was becoming so problematic. Suddenly, it’s critically important transcendence and independence was being threatened by its subsidiary’s outsized and rapid success.
It’s really important to keep in mind that the OpenAI board represents fundamentally different interests than those of the subsidiary developing and selling ChatGPT products. That they may have murdered the latter is not necessarily an accident or mistake.
“There’s also no way to replace the iOS kernel and drivers with the macOS equivalents: macOS only supports M1 devices, and no iOS devices past the iPhone X have known bootloader exploits.”
I believe the Apple Silicon dev kit ran on a A series cpu, might be the entry point to try to investigate, especially if a boatloader exploit is found.
I think one of the big unstated challenges (but implied by the reference to needing a bootloader exploit) is that KTRR/CTRR [1] prevents new executable kernel code from being introduced after the device boots, even if the kernel is fully compromised. This is a hardware feature and is not one that has (publicly) been bypassed in recent memory. In other words, without a bootloader exploit it is not possible to map the macOS kernel on an iOS device
You're right. M1 is a SoC, not an architecture. macOS used to only support Intel chips but that never stopped the hackintosh crowd from getting it working on certain AMD chips.
Imagine just how much low level fuckery it would take to get MacOS booted in a Snapdragon device of any sort. It would support absolutely nothing there by default.
If they are in the same city you could ask the city to rename your street 123 My Street South or something?