calcopiritus

This is actually true though. Basically every country has done it.

If printing money results in enough value created, there is no inflation.

Of course, you have to create a lot of value per money printed, which no country has achieved. And that's where taxes come in and fill the gap.

Many of the "economic miracles" involved printing a lot of money. But since their value output increased so fast, (and again, taxes) they experienced little inflation.

It is theoretically possible to print money without taxes and not have inflation. That would be more than a miracle though. If you get even more efficient with money, even deflation would happen.

It's the same reasoning behind debt. Debt is "bad" because you have to pay more than what you were paid. But if you are smart with that money and create more money from it, you can pay back the debt (including interests) and get some extra money for yourself.

The edge of the observable universe is not because of that.

It is because space expands. Therefore everything goes away from everything else. Therefore, everything goes away from us. And the more space there is between us and that other thing, the more space expands, since there is more space. Therefore, things that are farther away from us, get away from us faster than everything else. Only if it is close enough to us that gravity is strong enough would that something not move away from us.

This creates a peculiar situation. Things that are far enough away from us, actually move away from us faster than the speed of light. This means that no photon ever emitted from this far away will ever reach us.

That is the edge of the observable universe. The distance at which a photon emitted in our direction will never reach us, since for every meter the photon travels, there is at least a meter of space "created" between us. Therefore it never progresses in moving towards us, in fact, it moves away from us even though it is traveling in our direction.

Nah. For most of human history there were not referendums to "let them choose". They just annexed the place.

The referendums is a relatively modern "invention".

Asking the people that currently leave there is not always the correct course of action though.

You want that land over there? Then you just have to kill/displace anyone currently living there, then fill it with your own citizens, then ask them. Easy land grab. Also a genocide.

There was no colonization.

The issue with the malvinas/Falklands is that there are no "historically rightful owners", since no one lived there when they were discovered by the British.

But it's also not as easy as "the British discovered, so it's theirs", because they just discovered and left. They didn't leave no settlement.

The islands have a complicated history, both sides have strong arguments in favor of themselves, there's no clear cut "rightful owner".

Yes. Dying your hair crazy colors will get you attention. But it doesn't mean that you dyed your hair because you wanted attention.

If my dog goes too far away, I will shout its name very loud so it hears me and comes back to me.

Doing this will inevitably draw the attention of most of the people around me. But that was not my intention though, I just wanted the attention of my dog. The attention of the other people is just an unavoidable side effect. It may even be an unwanted side effect.

This is not a list of all the things they are banning AI from.

This is a list of every reasonable use of LLMs they can think of in their environment.

So if anyone thinks "hmm, I know they don't like LLM contributions but I'm just going to use it once for X". The immediate next thought should be "They don't even allow LLMs to spell check, therefore my single use of LLM for X will not be welcome, I will not do it".

Basically none of this is enforceable. The rules are there so if someone is caught doing something, it can be pointed out that that something is written in the rules. And also to give a general sense of what is tolerated or not in a community.

This reminds me of a traffic law in my country:

It is illegal to go all the way around a roundabout 3 times in a row. There is not a police officer ok every roundabout, or a camera counting how many times you go around it. But if a kid goes off and do stupid shit at 2AM with a loud AF car, one of the things one might do is do many loops on a roundabout. Therefore they can't just say "I'm not doing anything illegal, I'm just using the public roads with my car and a valid driver's license". Since one of the things they did was doing more than 3 rounds in a roundabout.

When standing up it's definitely harder to get the last drops out. Sitting is easy as fuck, just use TP. On urinals there is no TP, so can't get rid of the last 1-2 drops. Never have that problem when sitting due to TP.

They were (mostly) safe when manufactured. Who knows after 80 years. Things degrade

California, home to the most evil and powerful companies in the world. Lmao.

I don't think the difference is the minimum education for entry.

I'd say the difference is how much of your paycheck is because of you specifically and how much is for just general labor.

So a physics researcher job is "skilled" because most of the pay is because the specific researcher knows about physics.

But a waiter job is "unskilled" since the skills needed to do the job are the skills needed for basically any job:

• Basic maths skills
• People skills
• Willingness to work
• Physical endurance
• Enthusiasm to work
• Memory
• Handling stressful situations
• Other relatively basic skills

Of those, only physical endurance and people skills are "exclusive" to being a waiter. There are some actual jobs that require no physical endurance. And some jobs don't require as much people skills as being a waiter does. But the rest of them are general across basically every job.

Of course, "unskilled job"s do require skills, I just listed a bunch of them. But most of those skills, any other worker that does any other job would have. Therefore I count payment for those skills as payment for "general labor" and not "payment for you specifically".