> Maybe it's true, maybe it's not, but making the entire debate about her looks isn't doing anyone any favors.

There isn’t really much modern “debate” about Franklin’s work, though her Wikipedia entry is much better than that particular article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin

A good chunk of (but not all) his requirements would be fulfilled by an ASUS ROG Flow Z13

I think the VST author and the DRM vendor are different people and the author is poking fun at the latter. It’s possible that the VST author isn’t aware that the fancy DRM protection they paid for doesn’t cover runtime.

I think the VST author knew that fine, but they figured that:

1) Protecting the installer will take care of most casual piracy

2) Protecting the VST might lead to unpredictable performance and issues on something that needs to run in real-time

So they chose to only protect the installer, which seems like a very user-friendly choice. I both enjoyed the writeup and want to second supporting the developer by buying a license.

That’s also possible, and even if that were the case I don’t see how this article is even tangentially saying that the VST author is a bad person or toxic or whatever the comment I was responding to mentioned.

It’s kind of a rote “this is a bad implementation” post that’s pretty obviously about the DRM vendor and not the guy that made a bass boost plugin for djs or whatever it is.

> Disney? Meh - they've got Andor and that's really it.

I like this post about how The Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Mad Max and Harry Potter are all valuable IP written by somebody that appears to have never heard of Marvel comics, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, The Simpsons, any Pixar film, Avatar, The X-Files, or The Bachelor.

Imagine posting “sorry that the facts bother you” and then linking to

- A study with a sample a size < 50

- A study that says that medication improves outcomes over CBT

- A study that says that evidence for CBT improving ADHD symptoms comes from studies with such small sample sizes that the conclusions could be the result of bias

The only way someone could conclude “CBT has the same outcome as medication” from the studies you linked to would be to not read them. The first two don’t really say that and the third one literally refutes that position.

>The only way someone could conclude “CBT has the same outcome as medication” from the studies you linked to would be to not read them.

Fortunately for them, that's often the case. I've seen at least a couple internet arguments with LLM-generated "sources" that didn't actually exist.

“Mass media” didn’t use to mean my computer mumbling gibberish to itself with no user input in Notepad on a pc that’s not connected to the internet

> IBM invented/developed/introduced magnetic stripe cards, UPC Barcodes, the modern ATM, Hard drives, floppies, DRAM, SQL, the 360 Family of Mainframes, the PC, Apollo guidance computers, Deep Blue. IBM created a far share of the future we're living in.

Well put. “IBM was wrong about computers being a big deal” is a bizarre take. It’s like saying that Colonel Sanders was wrong about chicken because he, uh… invented the pressure fryer.

> IBM has not exactly had a stellar record at identifying the future.

This would be very damning if IBM had only considered three businesses over the course of seventy years and made the wrong call each time.

This is like only counting three times that somebody got food poisoning and then confidently asserting that diarrhea is part of their character.

What happens to Bun in a scenario where Anthropic goes under?