The Chevy Suburban has been one of the largest vehicles on the market since 1934. [1]
If you wanted an EV to match the Suburban it would probably be that Cadillac Escalade IQ in terms of size, comfort, and towing capacity -- that's got a curb weight of 9,100 pounds which is 1.5x heavier than the Suburban.
I'd think the BMW 3 Series has a similar vibe to the Model 3 and that has a base curb weight of 3536 which is about 10% less than the Model 3.
[1] it's the oldest nameplate that's been made continuously
It'd be interesting to see the entire chat, lots of people seem to just keep using the same chat window and end up poisoning the LLM with massive amounts of unhelpful context.
The gcloud CLI handles this using argparse, having a parent mutex group with one child —no-timeout flag and then a child group containing the timeout flags.
Hmm I was hoping these would be bridging the gap between what's already been availalbe on their audio API or in the RealtimeAPI vs. Advanced Voice Mode, but the audio quality is really the same as its been up to this point.
Does anyone have any clue about exactly why they're not making the quality of Advanced Voice Mode available to build with? It would be game changing for us if they did.
I think this is very interesting about Billboard Top 100 artists, however there are TONS of artists and bands that have never cracked the Billboard Top 100 yet have been making music and doing live shows for years/decades successfully. I would guess/assume that these artists vastly outweigh the # of artists who have had a Top 100 song or album.
While I'm sure most artists would love to have a Top 100 album or song and the associated wealth it brings, I feel many would also love continuing to create music and tour on it while making a decent living for years. Leaving out these artists in the discussion I feel skews the point of the article.
I think most musicians "have been making music and doing live shows for years/decades successfully" don't actually make sufficient money to live but rather do it as a hobby (my only reference is living in a tourist town and knowing a few local musicians).
I believe the only working professional musicians out there are basically working for the film, video game or music (as session musicians) industries making music to order (plus some professional teachers).
All you need is a small and loyal fanbase to make a living with touring and merch , plus you keep a greater % of revenue instead of the manager taking it
I've heard the claim you have a whole new crop of musicians making reasonable money with tours and Patreon. I'm skeptical - any references for how many.
It's a bit different but I watch a lot of D&D advice youtube channels. The single most popular of them (the entertaining Ginnie D) can make a bare living at it but nearly everyone else has a day job. It's hard to believe the situation for musicians would have a different distribution of results (money made from fame just naturally follows a Pareto distribution).
I don't know if it is really comparable. I listen to a lot of music, if any of my top 50 favorite musicians tour in my city, I don't hesitate to pay 50 quid for a ticket. For some I am willing to fly out. If Spotify didn't exist, I'd have bought many albums.
But I can hardly think of a YT channel I like enough to pay money. I guess I bought a couple of online courses made by relatively popular YT creators, but that's about it.
I always see discussions on this topic online immediately start discussing how the content of social media is the driver of the mental health issues (comparison to others, everyone projecting their best selves etc).
My own experiences with social media and phone addiction leads me to believe its not JUST the content, but also (equally, perhaps moreso) the fact that teenagers AND adults with social media and phone addiction are just spending so much of their time absorbed into a screen scrolling and getting quick dopamine hits for hours and hours.
When that is your default that you revert to to distract yourself at almost any point of discomfort, slight boredom, lapse in focus, anxiety or feelings of sadness, all it does is just dampen those feelings momentarily. You live in almost a fugue state where those things just fester as you avoid them instead of learning to cope with them or respond to them in an agentic or healthy manner.
Working to cut out social media, reddit, youtube etc on my phone, leave my phone by our front door while at home, never have my phone in bed, and spend time writing/journaling my thoughts and actually engaging with my feelings of anxiety or depression or stress instead of avoiding them has been by far the most significant improvement on my mental health compared to many other things I've worked out.
This is definitely anecdotal, and its definitely my experience, but after the time i've spent working on these things and with what I see in the teenagers, young people, and friends in my life I feel very strongly about it.
I'm in the same boat as you, and feel equally strongly about it, despite being in a bit of a relapse period at the moment.
"The medium is the message" never stops being relevant. The 'content' of social media is just the 'reward' mechanism for your engagement.
This is the fourth (?) time on HN I've recommended "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman. If you're a reader, I think you might enjoy it. It is both descriptive of its time in the age of Television, and incredibly prescient. It has aged flawlessly, you can draw a straight line from it to our modern, socially mediated world.
Once I finally actually deleted all of the social media apps from my phone, it suddenly became a really pleasant and useful tool again. I have even started to read ebooks again.
... and how they steer the discussion from "social media" to "screen time".
Wikipedia helpfully selected a picture of somebody using an ebook reader as their illustration of what "screen time" means: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screen_time
I'm just flabbergasted with the level of smokescreen that goes on in this discussion. Pretty sure reading books on ebook readers is not what is driving teenage mental health problems.
I think about this topic regularly, the question of how responsible a person should be for the unintentional effects of their actions.
In general society agrees that people are responsible for unintentional effects to their actions when they're obvious and predictable, such as involuntary manslaughter for killing someone while driving drunk. A reasonable person should understand the risk of that and take it into account before deciding to drive after having a number of drinks.
Where it gets more complicated and divisive is when the unintentional effects become less obvious or easily attributable.
I feel there are lots of behaviors that we're able to show empirically have negative impacts on the world yet aren't immediately obvious or unavoidably attributable, and because they're not intuitably, at-first-glance attributable there begin to be people who dismiss them despite empirical evidence proving their cause. Things like chemical dumping into rivers as an externality of an industrial process causing health impacts to surrounding communities come to mind as an example.
Where it gets even fuzzier is when impacts are social and diffuse.
A place I see a lot of discussion related to this topic is in the comedy world. You regularly see people criticize comedians for their jokes being harmful or hurtful. In my opinion these criticisms are sometimes accurate, and sometimes are inaccurate due to mistaking the topic of a joke as being the butt of it (a good example highlighting the difference I feel is Shane Gillis' jokes about autism from his standup https://youtu.be/ly14Pr2RLys, vs him calling out Andrew Shultz for jokes on the same topic but done in a derogatory manner: https://youtu.be/ENpTQ6ws3P8?t=954).
The general retort from comedians to people criticizing them is that "The intent of the joke isn't bad, it's all about the intent." I feel this is partially true, but it completely ignores the potential unintended consequences of the things they say, and the potential responsibility people have for the them.
I think this area and ones like it, involving the question of to what degree people with cultural influence should be held accountable for the unintentional impacts of their influence is really interesting and complex. I don't have much more to say beyond that I find it interesting and nuanced.
It is indeed all about the intent and like a dog knows the difference between being kicked and tripped over, we instinctively know the intent. If in our social outrage, we decide to ignore our instinct, then we are essentially just looking for excuses to grandstand our outrage. This grandstanding has the unintended consequence of polarizing a social debate to the point of demonizing and arbitrary adherence on both sides.
It seems that the desire to grandstand our outrage has exploded as we all now have access to our "15 minutes of fame" via our new global social platforms. Like children finding their ability to speak, society as a whole is still in a dadaistic phase. I hope that, with much time and troubles, we eventually learn to speak in a more mature way.
>I think this area and ones like it, involving the question of to what degree people with cultural influence should be held accountable for the unintentional impacts of their influence is really interesting and complex. I don't have much more to say beyond that I find it interesting and nuanced.
Well said and agreed. In our complex social web, the unintended consequences of every nuanced thing we do makes it very hard for the wise to be sure of the societal value of our beliefs and resultant actions. There are very few topics where I am comfortable fully embracing a side.
> How responsible a person should be for the unintentional effects of their actions.
This is already enshrined in law as "negligence" and "reasonable person". It's not helpful to hold people responsible for not considering every possible outcome of what they say, including perspectives that aren't well known.
For example, I'm bipolar. Almost every media representation of bipolar individuals is reinforcing a stereotype that is actively harmful to me. I don't think the average reasonable person would be aware of this.
Bipolar is not limited to mania and depression. I call it the grab bag of issues. My brain went to the grocery store of mental illness, stuck out an arm across a shelf on aisle 3, and swept everything into the cart, like a snow plow clearing a highway.
I may be mistaken but I believe that human/machine pairing was dominant for a long while, but the last few years the chess solvers have progressed to a point where they're dominant on their own.
Poker on the other hand I think human players still win vs GTO solvers, but again I may be mistaken here too.
Is there a single "intellectual" game left that humans can beat computers at?
I suppose an AI has yet to beat lebron james at basketball, but I suppose that's for want of having a body.
Model 3: ~ 3,860–3,900+ lbs
Suburban is about 1.5–1.6× heavier than a Tesla Model 3.