It was the unemployment checks much more than the stimulus checks that made a difference. There was an extra $600/week tacked on to those during COVID. I know a lot of people who were making more on unemployment during that time than they ever had made while working.
I use Github Copilot because it's what my job provides to me. But 95% of my usage is via OpenCode (which is officially supported [0]), not copilot-cli or their IDE plugins. The rest is autocomplete in the IDE.
I actually find it to be a great deal, especially because they charge by request rather than token. So if you provide detailed prompts a lot of work can get done for very little cost.
> I use Github Copilot because it's what my job provides to me. But 95% of my usage is via OpenCode (which is officially supported [0]), not copilot-cli or their IDE plugins.
Does the bug where premium requests get consumed for spinning up subagents still exist?
I've stuck to Visual Studio Code's GitHub Copilot integration because of this, because I'm on a tight budget and didn't fancy burning through my premium requests.
But I'm also not sure what qualifies as a bug here, given Microsoft's weird billing model. If you get charged for subagents, you'll burn through your premium requests in no time. If you don't get charged for subagents, you can get nearly unlimited usage of premium mode by using a go-between agent with a cheap/free model.
Currently I'm doing the latter, although I have to assume Microsoft will crack down on it at some point.
> And you know it was a show, a mockery, because with cases like this where something equally bad happens and nothing will come from it
How is this case equally bad? It's just his private email being hacked, he did nothing wrong.
There are probably about a thousand things you could point to in the Trump administration that are worse than Clinton's private email server, but this isn't one of them.
I disagree with this take. I get that LLM produced text is filled with crappy, over the top writing in pretty much all cases, but if a prompter/writer/blogger is using it iteratively, the LLM output is going to be way better than their writing. Also, if a person is using LLMs to write articles, do you really want to see their likely even worse writing?
I don’t care about his income level. I just look at the negative effects of Facebook on society, his lying in interviews, the poor care about privacy, and things like that.
I mean, he did sue a bunch of poor people to remove any possibility that they might make ancestral claims on or around his super abundance of land. It is in really bad taste and a testament to his lack of character.
Gross mischaracterization. He filed an action in court to buy the land, because each parcel had dozens of owners that nobody even knew who they were, including the owners, until the court discovery happened.
"
The land is made up of a few properties. In each case, we worked with the majority owners of each property and reached a deal they thought was fair and wanted to make on their own.
As with most transactions, the majority owners have the right to sell their land if they want, but we need to make sure smaller partial owners get paid for their fair share too.
In Hawaii, this is where it gets more complicated. As part of Hawaiian history, in the mid-1800s, small parcels were granted to families, which after generations might now be split among hundreds of descendants. There aren’t always clear records, and in many cases descendants who own 1/4% or 1% of a property don’t even know they are entitled to anything.
To find all these partial owners so we can pay them their fair share, we filed what is called a “quiet title” action. For most of these folks, they will now receive money for something they never even knew they had. No one will be forced off the land."
There's a long history of rich assholes moving in and using their property rights in bizarre ways that gain them basically nothing while fucking everyone else.
Oprah bought a huge estate in Maui, then used it to block the back road from Kihei to upcountry, forcing a much longer drive around. It doesn't go through anything of interest to Oprah or gain her anything, just a big fuck you to everyone else because she can.
Sometimes I see a silver lining to this behavior but it comes down to personal taste. A number of people likely appreciate that nice buffer between them and Kihei.
Duration of effect matters when it comes to successful treatments.
If we take your position and apply reductio ad absurdum, we could say that cocaine is a highly effective treatment for anxiety, although of course we know that in the not-so-long run it has the opposite effect.
But a lot of psychatric treatments are just that. Treatment for ADHD for example is giving ampethamines (which btw are chemically no different than a low dose of meth), which have a duration of 3-6 hours and its back to worse than baseline after the effect has worn off.
There are multiple treatments for ADHD, including alpha-2 receptor agonists and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors. Some of them show patterns of increasing efficacy out to a year (the length of the study).
The reason amphetamines are used for ADHD but not depression is that they've been studied to show that the ADHD improving effect can remain for many months, while the mood-improving effect will taper off quickly if you take them every day. Almost everyone who takes ADHD stimulant, feels a mood and motivation boost ("so happy I could cry" is the common phrase) and then is disappointed when that mood boost stops happening after a few weeks or months will learn this. Attention enhancement is less prone to tolerance, though it still accumulates tolerance too. There are some studies showing that the effects of stimulants in ADHD diminish substantially on a multi-year time frame, and it's probably not a coincidence that many people (though not all) who take stimulants discontinue after several years.
No not just like it, because the only difference with methampathemines is that the added meth group makes it able to cross the blood barrier much quicker, hence why I said its equivalent to a lose dose of meth. The chemical/biological response on the body and brain are very similar, the difference is in potency
But onset of action is a very important distinction in medicine/pharmacology, as is dose.
Most abusers of methamphetamine are not taking it orally (slow route of administration) and are generally using much higher relative dosing than ADHD patients are using amphetamines. Potential for addiction and other physical harms are greatly affected by both of those things, so the comparison has some truth, but is obviously sensationalized.
No, the difference between amphetamine and methamphetamine is that they are literal different chemicals.
If one could 'add meth'(??) to chemicals to make them more potent, without changing the chemical, it would be the difference between (for example) citric acid and really strong citric acid, or codeine 2.5mg and codeine 5mg.
You'll note that neither of these involves changing the name of the chemical, because that is not how chemical names work.
As someone else has pointed out, the difference between 'hydrogen monoxide' and 'dihydrogen monoxide' isn't 'it's like hydrogen monoxide with added di', because that is ridiculous.
Please stop saying anything beginning with 'meth' is just meth with added bits.
It's a really odd misinterpretation of the terrible dangers of: methane, Methodists, methanol, Methaemoglobin, methicillin, etc.
Well, it's not that simple. It's reasonable to expect that you could see some increased level of oxidative and excitotoxicity. It's harder to draw a bright line around the dopaminergic system specifically because some level of neuronal death is expected over the course of a lifetime. We lose 5-10% starting with middle age yet don't tend to show parkinsonian symptoms until 60-80% are gone.
It's pretty reasonable to expect reversing DAT and inhibiting VMAT2 increases oxidative flux, the question is really how much not if. Methheads certainly get "brain damage", but is nudging the average loss from 5-10% to 7-12% "damage"? Is it meaningful? Over 30, 40 years that could very well add up.
Meth is also used as an ADHD treatment. I think the reason is just the dosages that are used by addicts compared to people who just need the ADHD treatment.
A typical legitimate therapeutic methamphetamine dose is around ~20mg (up to maybe 60mg a day). A typical dose used by addicts is around 1 gram. And it's usually smoked, resulting in immediate bioavailability.
That's a terrible oversimplification. Stimulant treatments for ADHD are not supposed to produce pronounced mood-enhancing effects. Stimulant treatment has been shown to be effective indefinitely in majority of people without increasing the dosage over time.
These days formulations like lisdexamfetamine and extended release methylphenidate are preferred because they have all-day efficacy with typical duration of action of around 8-12h which carries lower abuse potential.
extended release are just two doses of the drug where half the beads are delayed by ~4 hours. How is that different from taking two edibles a day and claiming full day efficacy?
That's not the case for lisdex nor Concerta methylphenidate. Some generics work that way and they're generally regarded as being worse than Concerta.
The benefit is that the medication automatically produces a smooth effects profile allowing you to live your life without timing medication to perfection.
A pronounced come-up and crash is a risk factor for abuse and addiction, so smoothing or removing the peaks and valleys is important.
I mean the difference is that you just take one in the morning? Which makes adherence easier, makes sure that the delay is constant rather than variable, and reduces abuse liability.
(As an aside, there are more complex extended release mechanisms than just delayed bead release - like lisfexamfetamine is a inactive prodrug, so cleaving the lysine off the amphetamine is rate limited. This has the effect of extended the duration of effect, and reduces the potential to abuse by snorting/iv/etc).
Shouldn't that be up to bodily autonomy? If someone feels that cocane relieves their symptoms then who is the doctor to say that they don't. Perhaps releaving those symptoms even for a short period of time is worth the consequences.
That's just arguing for drug legalization with extra pseudoscience.
I am all for people doing however much cocaine they feel they need. In broad daylight - let's just drag that into the light and let people go to the dispensary for cocaine hydrochloride, metered, measured and with warning labels.
Because the war on drugs is a stupid waste of time and lives, but no doctor or medical professional has to justify your own stupid actions.
It’s also an argument for quackery and snake oil, as long as the salesman declares “some people said it works!”
“People should be allowed bodily autonomy to take whatever chemicals they want” easily and dangerously turns into “People should be able to advertise and sell miracle cures that don’t work as long as their victims are gullible.”
Every snake oil fraudster hides their fraud behind principles like bodily autonomy.
There is already much snake oil sales and marketing going on, it's already enabled by arguments that are not based on bodily autonomy, which suggests that a move towards more respect to bodily autonomy will not noticeably increase such snake oil. The resistance to homeopathy has not gone well. I actually believe the resistance is actively harmed by making legit chemicals harder to get instead of easier. When people can easily get the good stuff that works there's not much of a market for the easy to get snake oil that doesn't.
I'm still kind of confused, but opencode itself comes with several agents built-in, and you can also build your own. So what does it mean to use opencode itself as an agent?
I don't really mind Windows that much for non-development use, once you disable all the bloat. But for development... It seems obviously a distant third behind Linux and Mac, and I don't think I've ever heard any developer say otherwise. And I say this as someone who is forced to use it at work, so it's not out of ignorance (thank god for WSL).
But that's why I ask what kind of development you do, because I suppose there are areas where Windows really is a good option.
Visual Studio(the proper one, not Code) really has no rival. I'm a C++ low level engine developer and the kind of debugging I can do in VS, I don't know if any other IDE that allows that level of control and overview of every part of the system. I've tried
Raider and Xcode and neither comes close to the functionality of VS.
> I think most painters are happy that they don't have to go out and grind up snails to make their own purple pigment, but are perhaps less happy if somebody can produce a painting indistinguishable from their own effort with no manual handwork skill at all.
This might sound pedantic, but I think it's very meaningful when it comes to art: AI's cannot (yet) produce paintings anywhere near the quality of a human painting. What they can produce are images of paintings, and those are not the same thing.
reply