My Mac IIcx with Apple Portrait Display was a lovely system.
Luckily most modern screens like my LG can be pivoted to vertical, and then the Mac lets you specify the rotation. There's no more need for vertical-only screens.
This is the area where I grew up.
The Angel is not just that corner, it's that whole neighborhood, although it is named after The Angel pub (which no longer exists). The Angel extends from the corner pictured, north to Islington Green, and includes the surrounding streets on either side.
Notably, Angel Tube Station actually moved in 1992, when London Transport opened a new station and entrance along the line, equipped with a long escalator, and they closed the old entrance around the corner which had a big lift.
For some reason, Apple Maps stubbornly refuses to use the new location and marks the entrance on the wrong street. Google Maps gets it right.
I wonder how long the "pair of" phrasing can stick to things that were once a pair of items and got redesigned to be one thing, like trousers, or scissors (originally a pair of knives). My wife always says "scissor" singular, which I thought was weird but now think is the just way the language will go eventually.
How long can we stick with "hang up the phone" and "off the hook" now there is no separate handset and no hook or base? And finaly, why is it "a pair of underpants" when that could never have been two garments?
Singular "pant" has recently-ish become accepted fashion industry jargon: "Our spring collection includes a khaki pant and a capri pant". I've started to see it creep from there into everyday language.
This might stem from noncount noun rules rather than any particular trend for the word "pants".
Typical example is the word _water_. It is noncount except when talking about types of water. E.g., this year we introduced a vitamin water and an energy water to our line of beverages. By extension, you can pluralize it: we introduced two new waters this year.
I don't disagree that pants might be slowly becoming countable, just noting that the particular verbiage of "a capri pant" or whatever can be produced using the usual rules.
The ruling also ordered Hamas to release all hostages, and Hamas has previously claimed they would abide by any ruling of the court. I find it unlikely though that they will comply.
> Hamas has previously claimed they would abide by any ruling of the court
No, Hamas previously claimed that they would observe a ceasefire if the court imposed one on Israel, conditioned on Israeli compliance with the same. They didn't say they would do anything related to anything other than an ceasefire order.
Hamas is not a state. ICJ is a tribunal that adjudicates disputes between states. ICJ has no jurisdiction to rule in regards to Hamas. Neither can Hamas bring a case against Israel, as it has no standing, considering it is not a party to the international treaty.
Apple should buy one of the local EV companies like Lucid or Rivian, it would save them years of R&D on the hardware, give them valuable automotive guidance on the software and how things work in the car world. Lucid's software R&D is run by many ex-Apple people.
Also, I don't think self-driving is a must-have feature and I speak as the driver of a Tesla with full-self-driving. It's just not that useful. Traffic-aware safety features are more valuable and easier to achieve.
Also have FSD, driving it since 2021 as part of the first big wave pushed to general users. I see V12 as make or break for FSD. It's not worth $12k or $200 a month today.
My problem with FSD today is the robotic nature of the driving. It's still too jerky. If V12 with end-to-end use of neural nets is the way forward, and early reports seem to show a step change, FSD on city streets can something that's better and safer than driving manually while feeling human like. Then FSD is really useful. The NHTSA enforced stop sign rules are a killer however.
“Gladius” was also the common Roman slang word for “penis”, so much so that the accompanying Latin word for a sword holder or scabbard, “vagina”, became the standard English word for a body part, losing its original meaning.
As mentioned below, a different sword is called Kukris. In Norwegian and Swedish, we have the word "kuk" that is a slang for the similarly named English "cock"
The Apple app store is a disaster for making a living as an indie. People can't find the apps so sales are low, market rate prices are also low. The only way to make a living is to rip-off users with misleading subscriptions, which I won't do. I made much more money writing $20 shareware in the 90s.
> The only way to make a living is to rip-off users with misleading subscriptions
(Personal experience/anecdata follows.)
I don't know. I sell a macOS/iOS productivity app on the App Store[1], and while not getting rich there, I can tell you that's actually useful to people, you can put a non-peanuts price tag on it. I love that it's relatively straightforward to get an app out in front of a lot of potential customer.
That said, I wouldn't never rely on the App Store to surface my app on its own, it's ridiculous.
There are a bunch of people who make enough money to live on the App Store, even without subscriptions. I'm one of them. I've heard of a few others as well.
There are a lot of things that suck on the App Store, but it's definitely possible to make a living.
That’s by design. You are meant to work for a corporation. Capitalism is nearly dead due to this - corporation flooding the market, drowning indie enterprise, and clogging money. We need a return to capitalism and do away with guilded corporatism.
The specific case here is usually referred to as commoditizing the complement, it's probably intentional at this point if it wasn't intentional from the start.
The gene that causes sickle cell anaemia actually provides partial immunity to malaria, which is why this gene has not been bred out of the population over time.
It's a recessive/heterozygous thing. If you get the gene from neither parent, you're vulnerable to malaria. If you get the gene from either parent, you're immune to malaria and don't get sickle cell. If you get the gene from both parents, you get sickle cell. A hypothetical future person who's going to be born in an area with a lot of malaria would really want exactly one parent with sickle cell and one parent lacking the gene completely to guarantee the best personal outcome, or they'd want exactly one heterozygous parent (for a 50% chance of being immune to malaria with no downside), or they might settle for the gamble of two heterozygous parents (50% chance of immunity, 25% chance of sickle cell).
This sounds like Tay Sachs for Africans. Read that carriers of Tay Sachs might have defended them against tuberculosis, and they're also looking at gene therapy for it.
Prevention is the preferred method of passing this trait on however.
But practically, it'd be a huge challenge. Nigeria's one of the main victims of malaria and, not by coincidence, one of the main victims of sickle cell. There are IVF clinics in Nigeria, but they're very expensive even before you consider sickle cell testing. It likely wouldn't scale to all of the births per day, and something like a quarter of the country would need it.
But it's not IMPOSSIBLE. You'd need to do maybe 75 or so per day to cover the 25% or so of the country that have the gene and would need it. Hard and expensive and impractical, but perhaps possible?
Without access to modern hospital treatments it is fairly normal to die very young from sickle cell disease - it causes 100k+ deaths a year.
An in-law of an ex has it, and regularly spends days in hospital during crises. Without access to a high quality hospital he'd have been dead a long time ago.
The average life expectancy for someone with sickle-cell disease in developed countries is 40-60 years, and serious crises tend to start from childhood.
That said, it's recessive, and so it's likely the reverse of what you think: It's not primarily the people with full-blown disease who contributes most to the long term survival of the trait, but that the trait alone confers fairly significant advantage in regions where Malaria is huge killer mostly without causing health problems. So across the combined set of carriers and those with the full disease, the life expectancy in Malaria stricken areas tends to be higher.
Pattern of change of the prevalence of the trait correlating with changes in prevalence of Malaria has been observed many places. E.g. the prevalence among US black people is significantly lower and dropping than in the areas their ancestors came from.
I think this is right, but just to spell out the recessive gene implications for readers, here's the Punnnett square[1] :
R | r
+----+----+
R | RR | Rr |
--+---------+
r | Rr | rr |
+---------+
The people with sickle cell disease are "rr" — that's 1/4 the population.
The people who have some malaria resistance are all of the ones with "r".
In particular, the "Rr" folks have the resistance, but not the anemia.
So basically, this gene screws over 1/4 of the population and benefits 1/2.
In areas with lots of malaria, this tradeoff is worthwhile, evolutionarily speaking.
One of those harsh cases where evolution (if we personify it) does not care about individuals — only the species.
Africa wasn't colonized by Europe until vaccines and treatments were invented because of malaria and other tropical diseases. Quinine was one of the last ingredients needed to conquer Africa.
Good point and thanks for being on-topic. Humans have three variants of the HBB gene and having sickling mutations in the variant expressed in adult is causal to SC disease.
The FDA-approved treatments reactivate the fetal HBB gene in adults and this change in gene expression control effectively prevents SCD.
Very cool and transformative work. Now we have to get the price tag down from seven figures to four or five figures so that it will be used widely. That may be a few decades. Let’s hope that more efficient alternatives are developed soon.
From an efficiency standpoint, I think having to harvest and modify the patient's stem cells is probably the biggest choke point, right? I would imagine that if you could inject something once and be done with it (I'm thinking like Zolgensma), you could mass produce it more effectively
Correct, but if we have good treatments for malaria (e.g. hydroxychloroquine, atorvaquinone) then I would argue that we no longer need that partial immunity
reply