I would imagine local credit is more expensive to access and doesn't have the pre-existing structure to account for more reliable collateral. Another user here[0] says that using cows as collateral is an old scam there. So either this is an expansion of the scam in the worst case (possible) or it's to compensate for the fact that local lenders are trained by interaction to not lend to what looks like the latest scheme (i.e. this well has been long ago poisoned).
e.g. if you go to suburban Japan and you walk by someone on the street who asks you for help and needs to call someone, you may lend them your phone. If the same thing were to happen in SF, you shouldn't. And so, perhaps, if you were a good guy you go ask a Japanese tourist haha! Okay, well the analogy is a little stretched but hopefully you get something out of it.
huh? platform? lol. you go to bank with proof of collateral.. get secured loan. wtf does everything need a platform or some VC garbage scrambling to find rent.
Not familiar with the situation in Brazil, but it could be as simple as local credit being harder to get than global credit, or a desire to deal in a denomination that local credit doesn't typically offer without hitting a conversion fee.
A local farmer could perhaps figure out how to contact a swiss banker all on their own, but it would be a lot easier, and cheaper, if there were single place (or better yet, a few competing places) that offer a central place that anyone looking to use/supply credit could come together.
git checkout four copies of your repo (repo, repo_2, repo_3, repo_4)
within each one open claude code
Works pretty well! With the $100 subscription I usually don't get limited in a day. A lot of thinking needs to go into giving it the right context (markdown specs in repo works for us)
Obv, work on things that don't affect each other, otherwise you'll be asking them to look across PRs and that's messy.
You nailed it. I've spoken with doctors who were involved in changing DSM V to have a more inclusive definition of ASD with the express purpose of getting more kids access early intervention that they wouldn't with the PDD-NOS and other diagnoses from DSM IV.
That might be the intent but in practice the opposite has come true. The more narrow definition is more exclusive, which means fewer child with autism can be diagnosed as autistic. For example criteria under the description of Asperger’s and PDA are excluded so those children cannot be diagnosed as autistic and therefore those children cannot receive additional support. That is a massive handicap that requires main streaming children that cannot function or learn in a normal classroom.
I'm about to be one of them if it incorrectly accuses me of not being in my primary household one more time. The anti-sharing crackdown is driving me crazy (we don't share!)
If they were clever they'd pivot to allow sharing as a means of differentiating. It's a wager on how desperate they think they are. Not being desperate, being complacent, is what kills giants. Only the paranoid survive. I wonder how Andy would think Intel is doing today.
What are the actual tangible gains they make from this beyond just limiting the use of a Disney+ account to <=n screens and/or locations at the same time (where n can be 1 for all I care)? See also: netflix.
As long as your prescription isn't to extreme the VITURE Pro XR exists and is similar. I tried it and it worked surprisingly well but returned it because the headtracking didn't work on Linux and I didn't like the static view.
You can buy inserts for an additional $80 from official partner HONSVR, or less from AliExpress. My HONS inserts work as well as any glasses I've had. I have -1.50 myopia in both eyes, with different levels of astigmatism.
Oh, that's really cool though that they can handle it!
It's funny that 3500 seems sooo much to spend for hardware now... over the last 25 years, it's gotten so much cheaper between lower price macbooks and not needing to upgrade phones and laptops nearly so often.
Its not so much to spend for a full powerful computing device which you can do anything you need to on for work or play (like a powerful laptop or desktop), but it is a lot for a purely media consumption device like a headset (which is essentially a fancy TV).
The problem is that it is ingrained in people that these services are free, and the only way they are free is by having them feed a centralized ad network.
It's about time that people get used to the idea that you have to pay for some of these things.
In aggregate it won't even hurt to transition to that: consumers are, in aggregate, already paying for these things in the form of increased spending on unrelated products they were sold by the ads and increased prices on goods (because their suppliers pay Google monopolistic prices for ads).
The second is good, but it's mostly the plot of the first one. The third is a good Lethal Weapon movie, but with different cast. And I personally also liked the fourth one. Thankfully there was no fifth movie.
If that's intended as a commentary on the fifth movie I agree with it, but in case it's an actual misapprehension, sadly there was one [1]. It's more part of Bruce Willis' output during his cognitive decline than part of the Die Hard series, really.
The third film is fantastic, including in ways relevant to the article, playing with similar abuse-of-infrastructure ideas at city- rather than building-level.
It's actually a better city-level example of the first film's architectural ideas than the Nablus raid the article brings up. The Israeli forces' (horrifying, from the account in the article) "reconfiguration" of Nablus was a massively forceful one, blasting through wall after (residential) wall throughout the entire city *. In Die Hard (1 and 3) the protagonists' interactions with the civil infrastructure were far more involuntary and far less forceful, with the characters often being imperilled by those hostile spaces. Blasting through them like a Terminator wouldn't have been at all in keeping with the movies and the article does the first one a disservice by describing it in those terms.
The second one isn't great but I've always rather enjoyed it too. Far from diarrhoea, anyway.
* I should say, I know absolutely nothing about Nablus besides what's described in the article, and have no idea how accurate it is.
Completely agree! The antagonists also dig tunnels and otherwise subvert city infrastructure. I feel like it was a perfect example of what the author talked about.
Where did you get "verbal abuse" from? We're talking about competition, so a far closer analogy would be an NBA player having to play a a game against one of their friends. Should they not have to do that in exchange for their salary?
