Lol, that's great. I got one that was something like "Are you still coming for dinner? The chicken is just finished baking." It sounded delicious, I wanted it so badly to be real haha
90% of the time it works and you don’t notice the system because you only see the good result. This is the rare event when it breaks and you do notice.
Natively I would expect this to be true of every sequential year. Doesn’t really seem like news? Unless population is going to decline rapidly or something
> The yearly peak is not moronically increasing with time,
In recent years it is when you consider most of the crypto/AI use cases. If you meant monotonically then yes, but the degree is still affected by said use cases.
Ya, I know this strategy under the name “smokescreen mvp”. I don’t remember exactly, but I think it is advocated in the lean startup. Personally I am a big supporter of the strategy. Many startups fail because _nobody cared about the problem_, and this is totally avoidable
It doesn’t appeal to me either, but I’ve often heard “functionality, taken to an extreme, becomes fashion”. I think that might be what’s happening here. There are _some_ cases in which you might want a foldable phone. But even if you don’t need it, a (good) foldable phone becomes a status symbol.
See also: expensive mechanical watches, sports cars, bottles that hold temperature for 24 hours
Mostly as a curiosity, what you've written here is impossible, lol. I think you mean your grade would range from a D to a C+, inclusive. But you have written that your grade would be greater-or-equal to a C+, yet less-than-or-equal to a D, which would be.... impressive :D
edit: Closed intervals are great for communicating this kind of thing in general. You could say your grade is in the interval [D, C+], where the brackets indicate that D and C+ are included in the options. Compare to the open interval, which would indicate that D and C+ are excluded -- ie (D,C+) includes only the entries D+, C-, C.
Because I'm.. not young.. all throughout my education we were 'awarded' 4 points for an A, 3 for B and so forth to calculate Grade Point Average (GPA.)
Due to this system I have always considered A > B > C, etc.
Some of my children lived under a different regime in elementary school, which common core and non-letter grading assessments. Target, Near Target and Below Target.
A = 1, B = 2 reminds me of cryptography for some reason. That's probably due to reading Neal Stephenson.
Maybe the post is correct, but it offers nearly no context or evidence for its claim. As a reader, if I already knew enough to validate that this article was worth trusting, I wouldn’t need the article. On the other hand, I am interested in the premise, but don’t know enough to tell if the article is true, and the article has no sources/evidence to back up its claim. I don’t think there is any situation in which such an article is useful, except as an “echo-chamber” kind of piece
For decisions of this scale (ie, tens of years of development time, committing multiple products to a single unproven technology), the CEO really should be involved. Maybe they’ll just decide to take the recommendation of the SMEs, but it’s hard for me to imagine Elon had no say in it.
reply