FriendOfDeSoto

On a list of priorities, having a ballroom for state dinners and what not would not be high on mine. But as a big government whose reputation 47 hasn’t ruined entirely (yet), I can see the usefulness of a dedicated ballroom for these functions. He is all about appearances and little to no substance behind it. Some government functions are like that, even when the people running it have decidedly more substance behind it than this shriveled mandarin. I would have looked at a gazillion other issues first if I were him but I also take pride in not being him or being similar to him in any way. So let him have his silly ballroom. The construction of which will reveal either that they cooked the numbers or [clasping pearls] it was built by immigrants without the proper visa. You can rename it the Obama ballroom or something when he’s gone (eventually/hopefully) and I suspect you can pawn the gold leaf from the walls to help reduce the budget gap he’ll undoubtedly leave behind.

As I said, I’m really just making it up.

I could imagine a deranged billionaire, like imagine a son of emerald miners who used his inherited wealth to buy EV or space companies, somebody who is quite short and self conscious about it, with a small penis feeling he needs to have children in triple figures before he flies to Mars. Anyways, a filthy rich guy like that who has everything and now wants a memento of Napoleon. He’ll keep it in a secret basement and that’s where he will go to masturbate looking at it.

It seems weirdly specific but I’m really just making it up.

I think this will stay in somebody’s basement. Even if you took it apart, experts will be able to recognize parts of the jewelry even if they chopped it up, say, the gemstones that were part of it. There are probably easier ways to get the same amount of valuable materials that won’t raise as many eyebrows when you try to fence them. So either these thieves are learning that lesson right now or a mad billionaire is masturbating next to it in his basement.

This isn’t but also somehow is a shit post.

NSFW

I would say for 3 out of 5 recipes extending the time will probably work but you’ll need to eyeball and needle/poke it. But if the recipe relies on the baked good to form a crust at this higher temperature, the result will probably not be as good. That’s more crucial with bread. Test it before you invite people over.

Thanks for the correction

I would argue no one could choose one. A lingua franca is silently agreed upon over long periods of time. No committee sat down to make old Frankish the language of trade, modern French the language of diplomacy, and nowadays English the language of internet arguments.

If I had a magic wand though my vote is Klingon as well. Qa’plah.

Lingua franca is technically two words. Lingua franca refers to an old Germanic language lost to language evolution and time, not modern-day French. And using the term to denote a language that is widely understood by different people who don’t all speak it natively is perfectly understood, 20 years ago and today. The admittedly very eurocentric expression fills a useful niche because any explanation in vernacular English inevitably becomes much longer than these two established Latin words. But because it’s Latin the expression is also widely understood on the European continent as well.

A mistake implies there was a choice involved at some point. And it doesn’t even matter if you’re on the evolution or intelligent design side of the argument, us monkeys were never given a choice.

I mean technically this exists to an extent in English. “You can’t touch this!” - “I can too.” (Every word is stressed). Or endless sandbox arguments along the lines of “Not!” - “Too!” - “Not!” - “Too!” - “Not!” - you get the idea. It’s more pronounced as a concept in Germanic languages that haven’t strayed as far away as English has but they still have it.

Naturally.

In this scenario and considering old people are at a higher statistical risk of passing away: it is possible. However, the same message will play if you end your subscription because you moved to a different place and couldn’t transfer the number to your new place. Disused phone numbers don’t get redistributed right away, the phone companies use their own system of how long it has to remain fallow.

Backpfeiffengesicht, a face you want to slap or is for various reasons in need of a slap

You couldn’t “trust” video before sora et al. We had all these sightings of aliens and flying saucers - which stopped conveniently having an impact when everybody started carrying cameras around.

There will be a need to verify authenticity and my prediction is that need will be met.

Maybe the NYT’s headline writers’ eyes weren’t that great to begin with?

The tech could represent the end of visual fact — the idea that video could serve as an objective record of reality — as we know it.

We already declared that with the advent of photoshop. I don’t want to downplay the possibility of serious harm being a result of misinformation carried through this medium. People can be dumb. I do want to say the sky isn’t falling. As the slop tsunami hits us we are not required to stand still, throw our hands in the air, and take it. We will develop tools and sensibilities that will help us not to get duped by model mud. We will find ways and institutions to sieve for the nuggets of human content. Not all at once but we will get there.

This is fear mongering masquerading as balanced reporting. And it doesn’t even touch on the precarious financial situations the whole so-called AI bubble economy is in.

The problem is, I think, abundance of quality - or the lack thereof. For all the research based prizes, there is enough stuff floating around the ether that you can pick something interesting and worth the prize to be awarded. Old Phil Physicist, not by accident a man, will get the prize for fundamental research into clockwise spinning protons and that helps us today with welding or something. Nobody but the experts understands this and we’re okay with that.

And then Literature and Peace. They seem more subjective. Us non-labcoats have opinions on these ones. And thus the controversy likelihood is much higher.

Since they get awarded every year, it’s become a fixture in media coverage. Like the New Year’s ball drop, Carnival in Rio, the Pope urbi’ing et orbi’ing, Black Friday, etc. It’s predictable news coverage.

I don’t think they should stop it. Even the institutionalized reminder once a year that it’s worth it working towards peace is not a bad thing. I think the prize has the most gravitas when it’s awarded for long time services to peace on the books. Like giving it to the chemical weapons disposers, the red crescent/cross or even the EU, which has probably prevented more deaths from wars within than it has tolerated refugees drowning in the Med. They have done more good stuff for peace. It’s tricky when they give it to people for more current achievements. Kissinger wasn’t the peacemaker it looked like he was. Aung San Su Kyi was a great figurehead while under house arrest 1.0 - and arguably not great enough for the Rohingya when she was let out. Obama got it because they thought he wasn’t Bush, and then he sent the drones. We want our laureates to be saints and it hurts when we find out they are just flawed humans.

I would argue this isn’t a shitpost because it’s entirely accurate and not a tad off color.

I think there biggest problem with sea water is dirt, not just the salt. So it’s easier to waste drinking water on cooling the chips. The idea of a combination server farm and desalination plant is probably possible. Desalination is expensive though. I remember reading about Singapore’s efforts. So this would have to be a big investment with profits pushed far back into a sustainable future. So if you’re on the board and have this fiduciary responsibility to increase shareholder value you’ll probably throw your hands up and give up at that point. Without governments making wasting drinking water on server cooling expensive, this plan will never even make it to the c-suite.

Can? Sure. Should? No.

It’s worthwhile remembering though that the people who get it aren’t all saints. Although rape and sexual assault are particularly distasteful items to have on the resume, if the person repented and then contributed meaningfully to lasting world peace, they shouldn’t automatically be stricken off the list.

So those admittedly distastefully liberal guidelines should exclude any current resident of the White House then.

I think they should ignore any person who is so publicly thirsty for it. It’s a prize you get, not one you ask for.

It’s unnerving having to read that the US ally Norway feels like they need to prepare for retaliatory tariff action if the independent committee for the award, that only ended up in Oslo by a quirk of Scandinavian history, doesn’t award the prize to 47. Sad.