lol that’s a line so incredibly naive it hurts.

One does not “simply” reduce spending.

> One does not “simply” reduce spending.

Why does stock price go up after mass layoffs?

By your logic any company should just layoff everyone and profit on the stock price going to the infinity.

Company would no longer function of course but why it would matters if the stock price is through the Moon?

What happens when the only way to reduce spending is to reduce your assets? Seems like circular logic at that point. I suppose the market isn’t expected to be rational all the time, but eventually it is.

> It might work against people just use their Mini Mac with OpenClaw to summarize news every morning,

Good enough for me.

> More centralized web ftw.

This ain't got anything to do with "centralized web," this kind of epistemological vandalism can't be shunned enough.

FYI this article and thread is about Paris, France, not Paris, Texas.

We don’t really know if eating microplastics is particularly bad, but we do know breathing any pm2.5 and below dust is.

Common sense says yes it is bad

Wait till you find out you breath those microplastics as pm2.5 dust too

I believe that was LaGrange's point.

It was. I was differentiating between eating them (evidence unclear) and breathing them (pretty clear).

Yep, CO2 is a problem but pm2.5 pollution made many cities hell to live in - and much (not all, of course) of that comes from rubber tyres and asphalt roads.

That's just a weird way of saying that the reforms didn't go far enough.

Congestion pricing seems to be the simplest solution. Has nice clear incentives and less excessive top-down city planning.

"There was a rise in hospitalizations of pedestrians and cyclists"

looks at the reason

CARS.

Cyclists hitting pedestrians.

I used to cosplay as a bike messenger in Seattle. I did not follow the rules at all on my ride to work. There were few bike lanes, and a lot of morons rode on the sidewalks.

I have only been to Paris once, but the cyclists were much more sane in my experience. The bike lanes were clear, and for the most part they stopped at a red light.

If car usage is going down but pedestrian injuries are going up? The pedestrians are not crashing into one another with greater frequency...

Yeah, my experience was anecdotal. Also, cyclists can be assholes. However, they have less inertia.

What I would like to see is mortality rates of pedestrians in Paris in general. That might be the actually interesting trend.

I would wager it's the usage of payments and ignoring of pedestrian lights by cyclists is a big factor.

As a pedestrian, I've had FAR more encounters with aggressive cyclists than aggressive drivers (also anecdotal). Makes walking downtown more stressful.

The difference in severity of a crash between a car and a bicycle is on the order of 20x. Are you seeing 20x more agressive cyclists than motorists?

Anyhow, talking about the hospitalization rate without the mortality rate is very odd and smells of manipulation one way or the other.

Reducing congestion can increase car speeds, which can increase incidents.

But they are reducing speed limits also, so this is highly unlikely...

> Have fun being poor

Not going to lie, I’d rather be poor. Not destitute - I’ve been poor but not destitute and I’d rather not go desperate - but poor? As in (because “poor” is very imprecise and can imply anything between utter poverty to “not owning three homes”) like having a low paying job but still enough to pay rent?

I’d rather be that than do AI assisted software development. Genuinely the only thing stopping me now is that there’s actually way more skill and qualifications in most low-paying jobs than a typical software developer imagines, and acquiring those takes time and money itself. But by now I know multiple people who made the jump even before the latest madness, and they’re all happier. Some still code, but don’t even publish. Some are like “I haven’t used a proper computer in _months_ this is great.” All work hard jobs at odd hours. None regret.

Doesn’t matter. There’s no world where a multiplayer action game is worth it, and anyway this is a classic example of trying to solve a social problem with technology.

The reason cheating is a problem at all is that instead of playing with friends, you use online matchmaking to play with equally alienated online strangers. This causes issues well in excess of cheating, including paranoia over cheating.

> There’s no world where a multiplayer action game is worth it

To you. I’m perfectly happy to run a kernel level anticheay - I’m already running their code on my machine, and it can delete my files, upload them as encrypted game traffic, steal my crypto keys, screenshot my bank details and private photos all without running at a kernel level.

> trying to solve a social problem with technology

I disagree. I’m normally on the side of not doing that but increasing the player pool and giving players access to more people at the their own skill level is a good thing

Its not just for multiplayer games, considering one of my employers has been a victim of a supply chain attack, I would say it's super important that you can check and verify the authenticity of every piece of code that runs on your infra (checking that a binary/docker image can be traced back to an artifact, which can be traced to a git commit, and making sure the server running it hasn't been tampered with in any way)

> Well, admins (or anybody other than the developers / deployment pipeline) having permissions to alter the JS sounds like a significant vulnerability.

It's a common feature of CMS'es and "tag management systems." Its presence is a massive PITA to developers even _besides_ the security, but PMs _love them_, in my experience.