The limitations you faced in the past have given you enough energy to build something great today. Congratulations

Look, I agree that 1.5 °C is looking more and more out of reach, but we can't pretend the Paris Agreement was completely useless either. Thanks to it, the world shifted from a catastrophic **+4 °C** trajectory down to around **2 °C to 2.5 °C** — still bad, sure, but it proves the pressure actually worked. On top of that, solar and wind energy became cheaper than coal almost everywhere globally, and electric vehicle sales have surged in recent years. The 1.5 °C target might have been politically unrealistic, but it still works as a crucial emergency brake to speed up the tech transition that's already underway.

This opens a fascinating yet concerning debate about the future of cybersecurity. On one hand, it demonstrates the potential of advanced models to autonomously identify and patch security flaws before they are exploited. On the other hand, when alignment fails and the model goes rogue, the attack vector becomes completely unpredictable. How do you patch or contain an emergent behavior that even the team that trained the model cannot 100% predict?

This is the kind of content I like reading here the most. I try out some of these things whenever I can (y)

Great write-up, especially the part about the limits of `set -e` — that's the kind of thing you only really learn the hard way. Just wanted to add a detail that's helped a lot on my team: there's an option called `shopt -s inherit_errexit` that solves exactly the command-substitution case you mentioned. Without it, an error inside `$(...)` can slip through even with `set -e` active, because the subshell doesn't inherit the stop-on-error behavior. With the shopt on, that changes. ```bash set -euo pipefail shopt -s inherit_errexit ``` Worth turning on right after `set -euo pipefail`, especially in scripts that do a lot of assignment via `$(command)`. It doesn't fix everything (the `if` case you mentioned is by design, not a bug), but it closes one more common gap. One more thing on `trap`: besides `EXIT`, it's worth catching `INT` and `TERM` separately when the script receives signals from an orchestrator (systemd, supervisord, k8s), because the default propagation behavior can vary depending on how the process was started. I've seen a script clean up fine on a manual Ctrl+C and leave junk behind when the container got killed with `SIGTERM`.

Here’s an idea for anyone who wants to take it a step further: replace the LED with a multimeter in the first step, just to measure the actual voltage of each lemon before connecting everything in series. You’ll notice that not every lemon performs the same—some that are more shriveled deliver much less energy—and this helps you understand in practice why the circuit sometimes doesn’t work right away, even when everything is set up correctly. It would also be worth testing a potato instead of a lemon to see which one holds the current longer, since potatoes tend to last longer than lemons, which dry out quickly after a few hours.

I started to like Mick Jagger when he began incorporating blues into his songs; as a fan of the genre, that made me really admire his work.

Yeah, I agree the transition was worth it in the end, nobody wants to go back to memorizing memory commands just to run a game. But DOS had one thing I still miss to this day, the speed. You'd turn the PC on and be at the prompt in seconds, no hidden services running in the background, no indexing, nothing quietly eating up RAM. And there was a raw kind of control over the machine that Windows slowly took away, you knew exactly what everything did because you had to configure it all by hand, the autoexec, the config.sys, every sound card IRQ. It's easier today, no question, but it's also more opaque. Sometimes that convenience gain came paired with a real loss in understanding how the machine actually worked underneath.

"Nonsense" until it knocks on your door, right? The article brought scientific data from UCLA and Alzheimer’s research centers, this isn't just some internet coach's opinion. Obviously, people who did heavy labor back then got sick too, the only difference is that medicine back then just signed the death certificate without understanding that chronic stress and despair kill you too. Having a reason to get up changes your body chemistry, and ignoring science just to act tough doesn't make you healthier, it just makes you uninformed.

This isn’t really about building a ballroom, it’s about how it was pushed through. Using an office that sidesteps normal bidding rules to approve a massive no-bid contract raises a pretty clear red flag. It may be legal on paper, but it looks designed to avoid oversight. The claim that no public money would be used doesn’t really hold up either. Once costs start rising and taxpayers end up covering part of it, it feels like a convenient promise that got adjusted along the way. Another uncomfortable point is Trump’s direct involvement in cost negotiations. The person in power shouldn’t also be influencing the price. That blurs basic lines of governance and accountability. And the “national security” argument to justify secrecy sounds more like a shield than a real necessity in this case. In the end, it just looks like questionable priorities. Spending half a billion on a ballroom, given everything else going on, isn’t exactly the kind of decision that builds public trust.

Today’s Supreme Court decision hits on a long-standing, complex issue: the exact limits of presidential power over the economy and institutions that are supposed to be independent. Beyond the personal clash between Donald Trump and Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, the ruling brings a pretty serious institutional tug-of-war to light. The most striking part is how the Court balanced its decision. In the broader case (*Trump v. Slaughter*), the justices did expand White House powers, overturning a nearly century-old precedent to allow the president to fire the heads of regulatory agencies—like the FTC or the NLRB—for purely political reasons. But the story changed completely when it came to the Federal Reserve. In a 5-to-4 vote, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joining the progressive wing, the Supreme Court drew a clear line. They recognized that managing inflation and maintaining market stability depend on the public perceiving the Central Bank as something other than an extension of whichever party is in power. If Lisa Cook could be removed without a formal, justifiable process, the pricing of American interest rates would be left at the mercy of political rhetoric, which usually erodes global confidence in the dollar. Inside the Fed, Cook’s resistance (her term runs until 2038) is part of a broader strategy to shield the institution from outside pressure to lower rates. The justification used to try to remove her involved an allegation of mortgage fraud, arguing that she had listed two different properties as her primary residence in the same year. The Court viewed this argument more as a political pretext and demanded due process, blocking any immediate removal. This kind of friction helps explain why Jerome Powell decided to stay on as a Fed governor even after his term as chairman ended; there is a clear effort there to keep the gears turning without sudden interference. Ultimately, if the Court had ruled entirely in the government's favor, the reaction in the bond and fund markets would have been pretty rough. Central Bank autonomy exists precisely so that unpopular decisions, like raising rates to curb inflation, can be made based on technical data. Today's outcome ended up throwing cold water on the executive branch's plans for centralization, signaling that monetary policy still has a few protective barriers left.

Calling it freedom sounds romantic, but in reality, it just breeds nihilism and apathy. Humans need structures and core beliefs to keep from losing their minds. Without believing in something bigger, you're just drifting.

The truth is, Apple is basically making our wallets pay for the global cost of AI infrastructure. The excuse that chips are getting more expensive because of data centers is fair up to a point, but seeing a laptop that was literally born to be "affordable" (the Neo) get a price hike right out of the gate proves that the era of cheap hardware is officially over. Artificial intelligence has become an invisible tax on our budgets. The real masterstroke—and the most frustrating part—is that Apple just reported a massive jump in revenue. In other words, they aren't raising prices to stay afloat; they’re raising them to keep their profit margins sky-high, because they know we’ll complain but end up financing it and buying it anyway. It feels less like a market adjustment and more like a loyalty test. And there’s a sweet piece of irony here: seeing Apple having to turn to Intel to handle chip manufacturing proves that not even all the money in the world can shield a company from current production bottlenecks. Their pristine, closed ecosystem just showed a little crack in the logistics armor. But let me ask you: where do you draw the line financially with their ecosystem? Would a price hike like this make you throw in the towel and switch to Windows or Android, or is your dependence on the Apple ecosystem already too deep to even consider moving?

I don't know why, but lately I've been more interested in using gemini.google.com

It is incredibly heavy to hear what Moshe is going through, and honestly, using his trademark humor to cope with a literal neck dissection is a testament to how comics process trauma. It is great that he is using this moment to shout about the HPV vaccine, especially since throat and tonsil cancers in men are so rarely talked about compared to other health issues. That being said, while I totally get his anger and why he is aggressively pushing the vaccine, I think it is important to keep a bit of perspective on how people handle medical choices. Shaming parents or telling them to "work out their anxieties" somewhere else usually backfires and makes people double down on skepticism. Vaccine hesitancy is messy, and a lot of it comes from a lack of trust in huge pharmaceutical systems, not just random ignorance. Also, it is worth remembering that while the vaccine is an amazing preventative tool for the younger generation, it doesn't change the immediate reality for adult men who missed the age window entirely when the vaccine first rolled out. For guys who are already in that vulnerable under-55 bracket, the real conversation we need to be having isn't just about childhood shots—it is about getting doctors to actually take a "random bump" in the throat seriously during routine checkups, since early detection is exactly why Moshe's prognosis is so high.

I think the alert is super valid, mostly because these frozen meals that save us on busy nights tend to sit forgotten at the back of the freezer for months, and most people won't even think to check the packaging. But honestly, I don't see any reason for collective panic. Voluntary recalls due to foreign objects (like plastic or metal) happen all the time in large-scale food manufacturing, whether it's meat, veggies, or plant-based stuff. The fact that MorningStar itself came forward to isolate those specific July 2027 batches shows that their traceability system actually works. The actual risk is strictly limited to those two specific items. So, the smart move is just to check your freezer, toss it out if you happen to have one of those at home, and move on with your life. At the end of the day, food safety regulations did their job—they caught the mistake before it turned into a bigger problem.

lol

It's wild to see how the far-right influencer ecosystem in the US has turned into such an out-of-control paranoia machine that it has started devouring its own creators. The bizarre rumor about Candace Owens' death didn't just appear out of nowhere; it exploded because she spent months fueling conspiracy theories that her former ally Charlie Kirk had been assassinated in a geopolitical plot. By creating this constant climate of persecution, Candace ended up paving the way for any temporary absence from the internet to be instantly interpreted by her own followers as a cover-up. In the end, this whole story shows how that digital bubble operates in such an extreme state of paranoia that it's willing to cannibalize its biggest figures for the sake of engagement.

Tay Keith's greatest legacy as a producer was shaping the sound of modern trap with minimalist, heavy-hitting beats. He achieved the rare feat of creating an instantly recognizable sonic identity, which led him to produce massive hits like Travis Scott's "Sicko Mode" and Drake's "Nonstop." Instead of just following industry trends, he dictated the rhythm of mainstream hip-hop in recent years, reaching the top of global charts and earning Grammy nominations before his tragic passing.

That's really interesting. Could you post some of that stuff here?

I have always looked for some answers to which I still haven't gotten concrete answers. Here are some of them, please answer any of them if you know: 1. **Is digital sharing actually stealing?** Back then, people argued that copying a disk didn't deprive anyone of physical property. Today, we say the same about digital files. Where do you draw the line between sharing and theft? 2. **Does piracy hurt sales, or is it just free marketing?** Many users only bought original software later because they fell in love with a copied floppy first. Does piracy destroy industries, or does it actually build their user base? 3. **If a product is inaccessible in your country, do you have a moral right to pirate it?** In the 90s, high import barriers forced people's hands. Today, geo-blocking on streaming apps and regional software locks still do. Is piracy justified when the official market ignores you? 4. **Do we actually own what we buy?** Users used to fight corporate "code wheels" and dongles just to backup their software. Today, we fight unskippable DRM and digital licenses that companies can revoke at any time. Who really owns the software on your machine? 5. **Should vital digital tools be free for everyone?** The early crackers believed software should be free for the advancement of society. Today, as essential tools and research sit behind massive paywalls, the question remains: should software be a luxury commodity or a public utility?

Nevermind just confirmed that that style was in the toilet

I didn't sleep a wink last night because I couldn't figure out a problem with some code, and whenever that happens, it seems to cloud my thinking, I think

I agree with you. So you go into a marriage with all the freedom in the world, and then you want to get a divorce because of “irreconcilable differences.”

I think it has reduced hospitalizations by 38 percent and decreased heart and lung problems, so we should seriously consider taking it as we approach those ages. I'm 40 years old and still have plenty of time to think about it.

This was never about sport. It was a campaign rally with punching. Glad it's never happening again.

This isn't the first time Microsoft has looked at Xbox and struggled to justify the numbers. The original Xbox launched in 2001 with the company losing over $100 per unit sold, and by some estimates they burned through close to $4 billion in that first generation. Wall Street called it a vanity project. They stayed anyway. The difference then was that the losses were intentional bets on future territory. What Asha Sharma described last week is something messier: revenue down nearly half a billion in five years, hardware costs up 4x, and a studio system that's overextended. That's not a startup making strategic sacrifices, that's a division that outgrew its own business model. The YouTube line from Nadella is the most telling part. If there's more monetization of Xbox games happening on YouTube than at Microsoft itself, then Xbox has a cultural relevance problem in reverse — it's everywhere, it just can't capture the value it creates. That's a structural issue, not a quality one, and Microsoft has fixed structural issues before. Azure spent years being dismissed before it became the engine the whole company runs on now. Nadella still says the goal is to build great games and great hardware, just in an economically sustainable way. That's almost word for word what the original Xbox team said before shipping a console they knew would lose money. They turned out to be right. Whether this leadership team has the same patience — or whether the company does — is the real question here.

The collaboration is well executed. The black dial with the red transmutation circle, the indices inspired by Edward's automail arm screws, and the sub-dial featuring the Amestrian military emblem show there was real research involved, not just slapping an anime logo on a generic watch. El-balad It's priced around $455, with deliveries expected in January 2027. Not cheap, but reasonable for a limited Seiko with this level of detail. Essential Japan The usual problem though: distribution is restricted to Japan via AMNIBUS, which pushes international buyers toward resellers with a markup. Esquire covering this makes sense, it sits right at the intersection of menswear and early 2000s nostalgia that their audience eats up.

The most interesting point is the gap between rhetoric and reality. It seems much more like a political move by Georgia to gain leverage in its relations with the West than a real economic shift. At the end of the day, partnerships like this only become meaningful when they start to produce actual projects, real investment, and visible impact and based on what was presented, that still seems a long way off.

The issue here is less about “lack of warning” and more about a lack of practical consequences. Both health organizations and World Cup organizers seem too confident that general vaccination campaigns and basic recommendations will be enough, when in reality an event of this scale requires much more aggressive and preventive coordination. There’s a sense that public health is being treated reactively, only stepping in after problems emerge, instead of being fully integrated into the planning of the event from the start. Meanwhile, the World Cup continues to be promoted as a global spectacle without fully accounting for the public health burden it creates. In the end, the risk is not just measles itself, but this disconnect between those organizing the event and those responsible for ensuring it does not become a public health crisis.