• 0 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2023

help-circle
  • 100%, but ideologically she’s every bit as much a Jedi as Luke is here. He’s not had any formal induction to an organization, so that can’t be what Yoda means here.

    Yoda is also shown quite clearly regretting the kind of stagnation he allowed in the Jedi Order, which is exactly the reason Ahsoka was put in the hard situation she was. The Clone Wars very much set up her character as an emblem to show the rot that allowed Palpatine to rise, which Yoda acknowledges and regrets quite explicitly there. It’s not a ridiculous inference to assume he respects her and would validate Ahsoka as part of the “good side”, which is about all “Jedi” can mean in this context. She even explicitly and repeatedly tries to turn Darth Vader.

    Anyway, I do agree in that it’s not a massive plot hole or anything, but I’d say that if we’re ever explicitly shown Yoda meeting Ahsoka pre-Empire, this scene will be weird.


  • They’ve done a surprisingly good job of maintaining this scene, actually.

    Rebels: Kanan is dead by now, and Ezra would be lost in deep space at this point. Yoda also wouldn’t know about either.

    Mara Jade: 100% still a Sith Assassin right now. Also not Disney canon or anyone Yoda would hear about.

    Ahsoka: This is the best candidate, since Yoda would know about her, and likely regret the decisions that forced her to leave the Jedi Council, making it weird to dispute her status as “Jedi”. The most favourable assumption is that he assumes she’s dead.

    All said, remarkable protection of an Episode 5 made before episodes 1,2,3, multiple TV shows, and sequels.


  • Honestly… I kinda can. This is an extreme and unlikely scenario, but there’s a few things that make me think it’s not impossible.

    A) Trump has publicly promised to back out of NATO. B) Trump is generally very pro-Russia. C) Trump has generally had poor relations with Canada.

    If the US backed out of NATO, they’d have a lot of military power sitting idle, and NATO would be significantly weaker, as well as doubly occupied in Ukraine. Russia would certainly be interested in such a thing happening, given the strategic importance of Antarctica, and how much it would take eyes away from them. I also don’t doubt for a second that Trump would love to exploit our natural resources, especially oil, and the military importance of the top of the world. Not to mention it’d be an excuse to continue creating expensive military contracts and posturing as tough.

    This is of course, mostly fantasy, but Trump is nothing if not unpredictable.


  • Eh, FSR3 upscaling and FSR3 frame generation are different things. I’m personally a fan of upscaling, it’s great for a sharper picture on my large 4k TV without spending a fortune on a massive GPU (I use a living room gaming PC), but not at all a fan of frame generation, as it introduces more input lag for the illusion of more frames. Not a tradeoff I’m ever willing to make, especially when VRR already does an incredible job of creating the illusion (and a degree of reality) of good performance when my framerate drops.



  • Exactly, play by the original rules, and play aggressive as all hell. You don’t need almost any property, it’s just fine to mortgage everything but your main set, the goal is to get one very developed set ASAP.

    Not only is this a pretty effective way to win (a conservative player who lands once on a very developed property is basically out of the game), it also makes the game progress much faster, especially if other players are willing to concede before the bitter end. 2 or 3 players like this, and you’ve actually got a recipe for a decent time.


  • Eh, not much nefarious you can do by pushing data around. Taking a lot of CPU/GPU usage? Certainly, you can do a lot of evil with distributed computing. But bandwidth?

    Costs a lot to host all that data to push to people, and to handle streaming it to so many as well, all for them to just… throw it out? Users certainly don’t keep enough storage to even store a constant 100Mb/s of sneaky evil data, let alone do any compute with it, because the game’s CPU/GPU usage isn’t particularly out of the ordinary.

    So not much you could do here. Ockham’s razor here just says… planes are fast, MSFS is a high fidelity game, they’ve gotta load a lot of high accuracy data very quickly and probably can’t spare the CPU for terribly complicated decompression.


  • I think it is a problem. Maybe not for people like us, that understand the concept and its limitations, but “formal reasoning” is exactly how this technology is being pitched to the masses. “Take a picture of your homework and OpenAI will solve it”, “have it reply to your emails”, “have it write code for you”. All reasoning-heavy tasks.

    On top of that, Google/Bing have it answering user questions directly, it’s commonly pitched as a “tutor”, or an “assistant”, the OpenAI API is being shoved everywhere under the sun for anything you can imagine for all kinds of tasks, and nobody is attempting to clarify it’s weaknesses in their marketing.

    As it becomes more and more common, more and more users who don’t understand it’s fundamentally incapable of reliably doing these things will crop up.





  • Yeah, this is the problem with frankensteining two systems together. Giving an LLM a prompt, and giving it a module that can interpret images for it, leads to this.

    The image parser goes “a crossword, with the following hints”, when what the AI needs to do the job is an actual understanding of the grid. If one singular system understood both images and text, it could hypothetically understand the task well enough to fetch the information it needed from the image. But LLMs aren’t really an approach to any true “intelligence”, so they’ll forever be unable to do that as one piece.


  • Yeah, I don’t think the idea is a total non-starter, but I’d definitely like some details. How will this be limited to ensure it’s not being used by investors and house flippers? How will this be ramped down once the housing market settles to avoid it being permanently “priced in”? How will this be paid for and how much will it cost?

    Unfortunately American political debates right now are more of a pissing contest about rally turnout than they are about actual policy details, because that’s what sways the voters on the fence for some reason.


  • Honestly I really don’t think that’s effective either. Giving people more money to buy something generally just means the market will respond by charging more money for that thing. The assistance will effectively get “priced in” given time.

    It’s honestly the weakest part of the Harris/Walz platform for me. Trump plan is utterly insane top-to-bottom though, and they’re just using immigration as a scapegoat here, which is… something.


  • Eh, this is a thing, large companies often have internal rules and maximums about how much they can pay any given job title. For example, on our team, everyone we hire is given the role “senior full stack developer”, not because they’re particularly senior, in some cases we’re literally hiring out of college, but because it allows us to pay them better with internal company politics.


  • Ah, he recommends saving 1000$, then tackling your debt, then building to 3-6 months expenses. Which is… fine, I agree with the principle of it, but that number is definitely one of those things I’d consider being more flexible with. The amount I think you should save before tackling your debts depends on a lot of factors.

    I also don’t necessarily agree with saving that amount in two blocks, we personally saved 1000$, paid the most pressing card off, and then saved another 1000$. I think it makes sense to adjust that minimum emergency fund number as your situation evolves.

    Just another case where I find he works fine as a starting point, but where most people shouldn’t follow his advice to the letter.


  • Mmm, excellent addendum to my proposed changes. 1000$ is better than nothing, but it hasn’t really kept up with inflation, and circumstances really change things. For example, if you have a house, the potential opportunity and cost of an “emergency” goes up immensely.

    But yeah, for us personally we pretty quickly went up to a 2000$ emergency fund, despite the relative stability of renting and driving a fairly new car. We’ll be working on our 3-6 month expense emergency fund soon. I definitely think it’s better to view the baby steps as flexible guidance on a starting point, rather than the concrete law they frame it as.


  • I think I have an interesting perspective here, as someone who did kinda get their finances under control thanks to a Dave Ramsey course, and later had the unpleasant experience of discovering how much of a right-wing idiot he is during COVID.

    Something I’ve noticed is that a lot of his advice seems targeted towards people who are crushingly bad at navigating debt. One of the most viral things they do is called “the debt free scream”, where people share their stories on his radio show after getting debt free, and just… do a victory scream, essentially. Kinda fun, not really a bad thing, but it shows how most of the people he deals with directly and the ones that make the best marketing are people with hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars of debt despite making very average money. Just absolutely no self-preservation instinct around available credit.

    And for these people I think his advice makes sense. Absolutely no debt, debt is the enemy, it will crush you. And stuff like how he pushes you to chase paying debt with high intensity, get multiple jobs, etc. Because otherwise it’s impossible to even manage to put money on the principle of a debt that large.

    For the average person though? His best advice is basic budgeting, focusing on paying your debts one by one so you can celebrate each victory quickly, and building an emergency fund so you don’t need to go backwards as soon as you have a car problem. Also, yeah, ditch the brand new truck, it’s burying you in debt you didn’t need.

    But absolutely, I’d highly recommend modifying his recommendations for most people, and I don’t doubt someone out there is doing a better job of teaching this stuff than Ramsey is. My advised tweaks:

    • Find a budget you can live with, paying your debts a couple months faster isn’t worth being miserable, and makes it more likely you’ll be able to stick to a budget for as long as it takes.
    • Zero-based budgeting (budgeting every dollar at the start of the month) isn’t really necessary, leaving a little loose change that you can allocate later once the month is actually happening is pretty helpful. It’s ok to shift things around so long as you aren’t spending money you don’t have.
    • Actually do keep “fun money” or “restaurant money”, so long as you’re capable of including it in the budget without hamstringing your ability to pay debt. If you’re giving more to debt than these things, then you’re probably fine.
    • Ultimately just… think for yourself, and make your own decisions, based on your own income and expenses. Ramsey is a decent, if aggressive, starting point (and again, not the best person, he seems to have lost the plot somewhere).