Did you do the graphs in python?

Because the colours look familiar.

This "rule" only works for a small set of ages from 14 ~ 30ish

If you are 14 then the range for "age" is 14 - 14
If you are 30 then the range for "age" is 22 - 46
If you are 40 then the range for "age" is 27 - 66

At 30 the upper level is 16 years different; while it could work it is a big gap to bridge. It only gets worse the older you get.

This reminds me of something......gaining favor of the ruler is key to your advancement.

I hear those checks and balances are starting to look a little unreliable.

In the survey, released last month, 69 percent of New Zealanders said they had a good understanding of AI and 64 percent thought it would profoundly change their lives in the next three to five years.

I know that The Dunning-Kruger effect has been disproven; but fuck a "good understanding" means what exactly? The people I work with (are they representative of the population? Maybe..) have trouble using excel well, most people have no idea how their computer works or why it works. Just because you can use something does not mean you understand it.

Ok, fair enough.

I'm not from the US so my understanding of your system is surface level.

Could he give himself the power to do this?

What is to stop Biden from cancelling the upcoming election?

Being now his powers are effectively unchecked, couldn't he just call off the election as an official act. Rather than stupid shit like ordering assassination or deploying the military, just say "I'm cancelling the election until such time this ruling is overturned and a constitutional amendment is enacted that states that the president is not immune from criminal prosecution"

I was having a lot of random crashes and weird errors on my Mint install, using the logs, I tracked it down to a SSD fault.

I really didn't want to send it back, since I got it from Amazon and I'm in NZ.... So after a bit of checking I found that the FW on the SSD was not the latest. Updated the FW, went from at least 1 crash per workday, to no crashes in the last 6 months.

My SSD is a WD SN850X 4TB

You don't have to use those apps.

I get that impression from the article

This is why I don't like these types of platforms. If you are bitching about someone, keep it offline.

Sumner said she was shocked to read how staff had been speaking about her, and found the reaction to her request "deeply disturbing".

This seems like she is playing it up for the media, "deeply disturbing", are you really so thin skinned that someone calling you a schoolyard name is "deeply disturbing". I'm sorry but people have real feelings and have good/bad days. Was the language unprofessional, totally. Was language required or helpful, absolutely not.

That is not how time dilation works.

This story reminds my a a 80's saying;

"Your mouth is writing checks that your ass can't cash"

This lady doesn't know when she is beat.

That is not the adrenaline, that is the endorphin rush, your brain is rewarding you for surviving.

Get a boox, runs android.

You can even install the Kindle app. But seriously, there are bunch of good ereader apps.

It only seems compelling, there is no base rate of non-similar twins separated at birth. Is this 1 in 2 sets end up like this, every one, 1 in 100,000?

The neuroscience is interesting, but it is not in any way predictive. It is all post-hoc rationalisations of what did happen.

As I said above, I'm an engineer and look at this from a physical sciences point of view. There is no model (as far as I'm aware) that can predict what will happen except in very specific psychological experiments.

Yes, I am 100% on that.

If A causes B, that is true for all observers. Otherwise you get into causeless actions.

Imagine observer 1 (O1), sees one rock (A) crash into another (B) and it changes it's direction of travel. O1 has on opinion on the sequence of events.

How imagine observer 2, (O2) watching the same events from a different perspective.

There is no situation or perspective O2 can take which would have B change direction before the collision with A.

Therefore no matter their perspective both O1 and O2 agree on the sequence of events. Thus causality is fundamental.

The two men had married wives with the same first name and had similar interests and hobbies.

Similar <> identical.

This story has little to add to the debate about free will. How many identical twins separated at birth didn't have similar lives?

You can have situations where person 1 sees an event happen as A B and person 2 sees that same event happen as B A.

This is only true if A and B are not causally related. If A causes B all observers will see A causing B.

That is all well and good.

I'm an engineer, so I look at this from a physical sciences point of view. The main problem with the "no free will" argument is it provides no predictive power, there is no model that can say person X will do Y (instead of A, B, C or D) in situation Z.

What is possible is giving probabilities of Y, A, B, C or D in experimental settings. But in the real world, there are too many variables interacting in a chaotic manner to even give reasonable probabilities; this is why we can only use population level statistics rather than individual level predictions.