Yes, but not all clients expose dependent tasks (which is sadly a common issue with open standards: they aren’t always properly implemented). I’m using Tasks.org on my phone (which supports dependent tasks), synchronizing to a Nextcloud server with the Tasks app (which supports dependent tasks now, but didn’t for a long time), which also syncs to Thunderbird (which does not appear to show dependent tasks as dependents).

Edit: remembered that the Nextcloud Tasks app has long supported dependent tasks. I was thinking of recurring tasks, which it does not support. Again, open standards aren’t always fully implemented.

I think CalDAV (which uses the iCalendar format) may be the closest thing. It covers calendar items, obviously, but also task and journal items.

It sure feels like we’re at the peak of the Gartner hype cycle. If so, the bubble will pop, and we’ll end up with AI used where it actually works, not shoved into everything. In the long run, that pop could be a small blip in overall development, like the dot-com bust was to the growth of the internet, but it’s difficult to predict that while still in the middle of the hype cycle.

The original blog post (linked in the article) refers to this as a DynaRec, i.e. a dynamic recompiler. So it’s not exactly emulating, but nor is it the ahead-of-time recompilation that Rosetta 2 can do.

Relevant XKCD. Humans have always been able to lie. Having a single form of irrefutable proof is the historical exception, not the rule.

Days before the 2016 election, 538 (which Nate Silver founded and was leading at the time) ran an article titled “Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton”. Nate Silver and 538 did some of the best forecasting of that election. Don’t conflate him with others’ screwups.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_assassination_attempts_and_plots#Assassination_attempts_and_plots

You’re correct. You’ll notice every president in recent history has multiple assassination attempts listed. The bulk of them don’t go very far.

You need to sleep.

K-9 mail… isn’t supported or being developed any more.

That’s not true. They make frequent-enough releases, they post monthly progress reports, and they are actually going to become Thunderbird’s Android version.

Having said that, I almost switched to FairEmail because K-9 lacked support for some sort of authentication measure (which I no longer need), but that wasn’t because K-9 stopped development.

According to Wikipedia, John Riccitiello was CEO from 2014 to 2023. So I think your facts are off, unless Unity was planning layoffs and fee changes nine years in advance.

Instead, note that Unity went public in 2020. I expect Riccitiello was pushed by the board to improve profitability, then left with a golden parachute for being the scapegoat.

Archived version without banner.

If you want a preview of an uncaring and anti-consumer Valve, look no further than the company’s efforts on Mac.

Valve never updated any of its earlier games to run in 64-bit mode… Apple dropped support for 32-bit applications in 2019

Funny enough, the only platform with a 64-bit Steam client is Mac.

I don’t disagree with concerns about monopoly, but the author’s key example is Macs. And from the example, it sounds to me like Apple disregards backwards compatibility (dropping 32-bit support, moving to ARM chips) and Valve isn’t investing to keep up. Meanwhile, Windows has a heavy backwards-compatibility focus, and Linux isn’t too bad either, so no wonder they still get Valve’s attention. So who is being “anti-consumer” in this example, Valve or Apple?

The Atlantic had a good article on this a couple weeks ago (no paywall). It sure feels like a move in the wrong direction, but the authors note Oregon’s overdose deaths grew way faster than the rest of the country after decriminalization. Their take is that Oregon already had pretty good laws place, and that a little bit of a legal threat can help to encourage addicts to seek treatment (and that the treatment system needs to be better funded).

As I said to him, “in the US you don’t get to vote and get someone better than Joe Biden

Actually, write-ins are a thing, so you literally can vote for anyone else than him and Trump.

I think you misunderstood the author. You can literally vote for anyone, but the winner of the next US presidential election is only going to be Biden or Trump (barring a crazy twist, e.g. death or criminal conviction). I think the author’s point is that, in any given election, you should probably vote strategically, but getting better options takes a lot of work for a long time to make it happen, so get working if you can.

You know, you have a point. But I’ll note both instances had the UN request NATO intervention. Russia could have blocked either with their veto in the UN Security Council, but they didn’t.

That’s how Putin claims to perceive it, but that’s also what he would claim if his actual goal was to control his neighbours by force. And don’t forget Finland and Sweden responded to the invasion of Ukraine by joining NATO. If Russia perceived NATO as a threat, then Finland joining would make them more likely to be attacked. Clearly Finland feels NATO is making them safer or they wouldn’t have joined. And since then, Russia has moved tons of their military away from NATO borders and into Ukraine.

In other words, I trust the actions of Finland and Russia more than I trust the words of Russia.

Basically they don’t want NATO right on their doorstep.

NATO is not the anti-Russia club. They’re a defensive pact. Why would you be concerned about your neighbours agreeing to defend each other? Like a neighbourhood watch, perhaps. Maybe you’d be upset if you’re planning to do the thing they’re defending against. Which is all the more reason for those neighbours to band together.

I feel like you’re taking a very specific interpretation of the word “expect”. I don’t believe most people would interpret “expect” as being the outcome of crunching the numbers, so I still disagree that the headline is misleading. Still, I appreciate your explanation of your thinking.

The headline is extremely misleading clickbait. This piece is reporting on what people think they need, not what they actually need

The title says “Canadians expect they need $1.7M to retire”. The title says exactly what the article says, and incorrectly claiming it to be misleading diminishes the conversation here.

And here I was thinking of https://xkcd.com/664/