I appreciate the sanity check, but just to throw a monkey wrench into your model…

I think the square-cube law will bite you here. I expect power/mass isn’t constant. Mass grows faster than cross-sectional area which is key in muscle performance.

Keeping anything at any temperature different than whatever it’s interacting with takes energy. Hot or cold.

Ooooh… OK.

I was aware of the “what” of the lectures, but was holding out for “why”.

“Don’t regulate me”

Got it.

So if someone said “it should be replaced with straight immigration and citizenship” …?

All immigration is human trafficking?

I also appreciate yours. I think a fair number of opponents to h1B are just purely rooted in racism/xenophobia.

This is a case where I wanna hear “what do we replace it with?” From someone before I decide if we’re on the same page or not.

I’m not suggesting it’s beneficial to remove these people.

I’m suggesting that they be paid the market value for thier talents and that their presence benefit that nation, not a specific company.

H1B should be replaced by visas with no ties to a company. That’s it.

When you argue about global markets, i see that as completely unrelated. There is a mechanism for that already and it’s called offshoreing. You wanna move a factory or tech work to an area with a lower cost of living and can pay them less? Go nuts. You want people on shore? Allow them unfettered access to market their skills at the market price of the labour.

Again, I’m not against people who are here (there, the USA), and I empathize with rural Healthcare. As a rural Canadian all of my doctors have been originally from South Africa for as long as I’ve been alive.

This genuinely isn’t an anti-immigrant stance. My wife is an immigrant.

Bring people to your nation and invite them to join your society. The whole idea of bringing people in as second class citizens to be exploited is perverse. I’m not saying don’t have the people. I’m saying empowering those people is in the best interests of abso-fucking-lutely everyone.

Except the CEOs, i guess, but you’ll forgive me if I can’t muster a tear.

H1-B’s, being tied to a company, are extremely exploitive.

In Canada, you get fired/quit you don’t get a paycheck.

In the US, if you’re a citizen or green card holder, you get fired/quit you don’t get a paycheck AND you lose your Healthcare. This is a major way to abuse your workers.

In the US, if you’re H1B and you get fired/quit you don’t get a paycheck, lose your Healthcare insurance, and are ejected from the country. You can’t even just switch jobs. It’s extremely predatory and allows companies to fuck you so badly because you have so much to lose.

If the workers were truly great talent, it’s in the interest of the country to have them working ANYWHERE in the country. If they were TRULY great rare talents in industries starved for workers, it’s counter productive to not let the free hand of the market guide them to the best employers.

That’s the scam.

H1Bs, being tied to a company, provide a clear incentive for abuse by a company to use them to pay people less than market wages knowing there is no recourse. It deflated the market value of local workers. Average workers who’ll work for below average pay, accept unlimited overtime, and not push back on HR violations or even explicitly illegal actions by their employers is a big win for the company.

They aren’t the best and brightest. They by definition can’t be. With the reality of the arrangement, the “best and brightest” can and will and always have found greener less abusive pastures elsewhere.

If you want to be in that arrangement, you’re not that bright. If you can’t find better, you’re not the best.

H1B is a really bad program. Employers mobility would mitigate most of my issues, but that will NEVER happen because from the industry, that’s the whole point

Edit: I’d originally written a response that matched your tone, and realized after a smoke that it’s needlessly confrontational and snarky, so I’m going to take another shot.

I don’t mean to imply that it’s imperative that you don’t make your own screws.

If you wanna make your own screws, go ahead, but I still don’t think you should 3D print them. There are existing tools to do that which are cheap, simple, and will produce vastly superior screws. Also cheaper. A tap and die set is your answer there.

Also, if you want to leverage your 3D printer, use it for what it is actually good at which is creating complex bespoke geometries. Design your components with interlocking geometries such that you don’t NEED screws.

Screws exist as the convenient solution to a manufacturing problem, being that it’s often easier to create complex geometries by producing a set of simpler geometries and then fastening them together. The underlying problem goes away if you can print arbitrarily complex components.

If you think you gotta 3D print screws, you’re probably not even actually leveraging the new technology to its fullest extent anyways, you’re still designing with an old paradigm despite having new options.

I think you’ve completely missed the point.

We produce screws at industrial quantities, out of various materials, lengths, heads, pitches, etc etc etc.

The industrial scaling of this production results in screws being really really inexpensive. So inexpensive that depending on quantity you’re looking at, the finished screws are no more expensive to you than the raw materials.

Yeah you can print a screw. The question is why?. It will be more expensive per unit, more labour intensive, of worse quality, and will do wear and tear to equipment you own. It’s a lose/lose/lose/lose.

The one exception is that it is some mystical bespoke screw. And even then, it is likely that there are traditional methods which would better achieve that end (buy some screws that you can develop a process to modify in order to meet your needs)

It’s a good analogy. Yes you CAN 3D print a screw. It doesn’t mean it’s appropriate or even economical to include them in your products. Yes you CAN vibe code something. It doesn’t mean it’s appropriate or even economical to include them in your products.

I’m agreeing with Pete Hegseth? WTF is happening right now?

I mean, listen to your gut instincts, which is that you’re being foolish because he is a fool.

If your system demands trust, it’s a bad system. If your system has a written set of rules that don’t actually cover your requirements, it’s a bad system. If the “tests” you imagine post-hoc aren’t part of the system, you’re just opportunistically trying to shift the blame.

You made a deal, set the parameters, and what… Expected the for profit company to ignore their fiduciary duty to shareholders to maximize profit? What is this, your first fucking day of capitalism, Pete?

His response to this is engineered to shift blame, and he’s coming out swinging because ultimately he is to blame. It’s barely more than a political catchphrase. He literally invoked “America First”.

Excel is still doing the calculations, not the AI. The AI is helping to write functions.

This distinction is immaterial. This is like a big child grabbing a smaller child’s hand and slapping them with their own hand saying “quit hitting yourself”. It’s like trying to get out of a speeding ticket by saying all you did was push the accelerator… Truely it was the fuel injectors forcing the vehicle to an illegal speed.

Just because you’ve adjusted the abstraction layer at which you’ve ceded deterministic outcomes, doesn’t mean AI isn’t doing it.

You can easily spot check a couple examples then apply that same formula down the column.

This may be appropriate in some scenarios, specifically:

• When accuracy isn’t important

• When you will never need to justify what is being done to anyone (including yourself)

This, however, covers a decidedly small portion of professional work done using Excel.

Of you don’t know anyone you could be both

RIP to the ER staff in deep red states being subjected to whatever stories they’re gonna hear.

https://lemmy.world/post/31871839

Iran and Pakistan are absolutely allies. They do joint military exercises. They have a joint weapons production program. Iran’s diplomatic channels to the USA literally operate out of Pakistan’s embassy in Washington.

The subtext behind Pakistan doing it, and doing it now, is to try and bait Trump away from getting involved with Pakistan’s ally: Iran.

If Trump does anything to Iran, Pakistan is going to make a big fuss about doubling-back on their nomination.

Does the nomination mean anything? No. Is he going to get the award? No. It’s entirely a diplomatic maneuver for a very specific goal of keeping the US out of Iran.

Guess we doin rockets now

Cakes predate the Earl of Sandwich so really a sandwich is a subset of cake

/> Be me

/> None

/> any anime theme song

/> exclusively chicken tenders.

Should I be concerned anons?