Something being wet is a material surrounded by water

So if I set my hand in water it’s not wet because it’s not immersed? What if it’s not water?
Can other liquids be wet? If I dump water into a bucket of gasoline, is my gasoline wet?
If I mix a soluble powder into water, like sugar, do I have wet sugar or sugared water? Do they have to be in contact? Is a phone in a bag in water wet because it’s surrounded by water, or dry because there’s air between it and the water?
What about those hydrophobic materials that can be dunked in water and come out dry? What about non-liquid phases of water? Is steam wet? If I dump water on ice is there a difference in how wet it is?

The common colloquial definition of “wet” is “to be touched by a liquid”. The scientific is for a liquid to displace a gas to maintain contact with a surface via intramolecular forces. Water becomes a better wetter if we add soap because it no longer tries to bind to itself instead of what it’s wetting.

Neither of these has the water itself being wet, but you can have “wet ice”.

Let’s not pretend that a more scientific sounding colloquial definition is actually more scientific.

They know where the package came from, but the shirts are required to have a label for the consumer to know.

They are invariably being held to the strictest scrutiny because they offended the inspectors, but country of origin labeling isn’t so customs knows where it came from, but so consumers do.

https://www.cbp.gov/trade/rulings/informed-compliance-publications/marking-country-origin-us-imports

They obviously know where the shipment came from

Okay. You’re still doing tech support either way. I have no way of knowing how much free tech support you’re willing to give, hence my caveat of how much you’re willing to support them.

Netflix would disagree. People feel like they’re supposed to be getting access to a service, and if they’re not getting it they’ll complain to the nearest party to what isn’t working. In this case that’s you or Netflix being asked questions about why the router isn’t working.
That it’s wrong or irrational has nothing to do with who’s getting asked the question, and who’s the first line of troubleshooting when the service doesn’t work.

If people didn’t ask the wrong people questions, Netflix wouldn’t need support articles on how to reset your router.

Honestly, you’re supporting a chunk of her network by being a media provider in the first place. “It won’t play” doesn’t usually come with an assurance that it’s not a device or network issue.

Neither plex nor jellyfin seem remotely worth the effort to provide to others in my opinion, I just felt like sharing that there are ways to afford network protection to locked down devices.

I’ve got no real care for jellyfin one way or another, just sharing that there’s ways to make the network obey.

I think giving people access to my media server is asking for too much trouble personally. Now you’re dealing with forgotten passwords, people using your bandwidth at weird hours, and you basically become the media fairy, responsible for finding whatever it is people want, and then dealing with their issues when their device can’t codec at it for whatever janky reason.

I’m good at setting boundaries with family so it’s not stressful, just more annoying than I want to deal with.

Depending on their router and how much IT labor you care to do for these people you can actually configure a site to site VPN tunnel. All traffic for a particular address range will get routed through the VPN automatically.

It used to be a high end feature but it’s made it’s way into general routers since it doesn’t really require many resources and it lets you label it as having more home office features.

It’s certainly possible. Wouldn’t even be hard, since early crawlers were using radically smaller computers and the technology involved is now just available free and open source.

If you limit it to only curated domains you’ll find issues with limited content and difficulties discovering novel information.
If you need information on Peruvian sand art you can only find it if you’ve already added it to the index.

What you might consider is starting with a set of “seed” sites that you trust, and fan out from there. Use something like pagerank to rank encountered sites, and augment that ranking with distance from a known good domain. A site with a lot of link activity that’s also referenced by a site you find credible is probably better than one that’s four steps removed.
Human review of sites as they cross some threshold of ranking is plausible, since it’s easier to look at a list of sites that seem consistently okay and check if they’re slop than to enumerate the sites that aren’t slop from scratch.

One of the better ways to gain insight about which results your users find most helpful is, ironically, a non-llm neural net. Understanding what types of queries lead to which domains should help you guide curation and put trustworthy sites that users pick higher.

Skipping a few generations there. Manual indexing wasn’t feasible long before Google existed. Engines like the eponymous “webcrawler” would follow the links between sites and allowed searching the text of them.
Google came around later with enhancements to how the pages are ranked based on the relationship of links between pages.

Particularly with Irish people it’s more common. Theirs a few genetic pathways to the light skin common in more northern European areas. One of them showed up early in human migrations, and is pretty directly connected to production of the darker skin pigments. Adaptation done, no need for further tweaking to get vitamin D synthesis advantage.
These people tend to have irregular patches of darker melanin regions, hair containing only the lighter variety of melanin, and skin that burns easily because the mutation provides less gradient of melanin production, and more of a “yes or no”.
As a result, the path for that gene to be deactivated is also shorter and it’s more likely for people to have kids who don’t get it nor have many of the genes for the other ways for skin to be lighter.

There aren’t a huge number of genes that act like switches like that, so it’s very startling for people.

The soft power will take the longest to repair, but 40-50 years is a bit long. That’s on par with how long it took for us to build most of it in the first place.

Rebuilding could take 10 to 20 years. If he’s shit enough it could take two to six.

If he does Herbert Hoover levels of damage there’s likely to be broad motivation to take heavy handed action to fix it. Re-nationalizing land, nullifying contracts, and disregarding the impact it has on those who invested money or otherwise relied on the changes. Some of the programs being torn apart today are direct responses to trying to fix the problems Hoover caused.

It’s not a lot, but it’s worth remembering that Hoover had a lot of similar stances to Trump. He made things so bad that America elected the closest thing we’ve ever had to democratic socialism, and people liked it so much that they elected him four times and Congress changed the Constitution out of spite.

If just pasting it’s more arguable, but still likely permitted. If the copywriten characters are the central focus it’s more likely to be infringement.

Adding tracing makes it more transformative, and less dubious. Because of that and the “create a more homogenized image” part it’s closer to a new character inspired by the fusion of others. You’re not using anyone else’s assets, you’re transforming them via cutout, and transforming and adding your own creative work by blending them.

among newborns (0–2 months), RSV hospitalizations fell 52 percent

there was a 71 percent decline in hospitalizations in NVSN

0 to 7 months old—RSV-NET showed a 43 percent drop in hospitalizations

NVSN data, there was a 56 percent drop.

Shit like that is fucking huge, and makes me get some happy misty eyes thinking of the people whose lives have just been made better because of this.
30 to 40 thousand kids kept out of the hospital. Some heart wrenching portion of that as lives saved.
Every year. And that’s in the US alone!

I hope the researchers who worked on this feel appropriately proud.

Suggest she talk to her OB sooner rather than later. The window for the maternal vaccination is reasonably narrow, and some places where you might routinely get a vaccine aren’t accustomed to it yet and might take longer than expected to work through it. (If they give the vaccine too early the antibodies don’t transfer as helpfully, and too late and they don’t have enough time to develop and transfer)

My wife had a hell of a time getting it from the usual place we get flu and COVID shots because it was a more nuanced criteria and they, reasonably, didn’t want to give a treatment outside of approved guidelines. Eventually the OB said the back and forth was silly and had someone go get a dose from the hospital pharmacy and just gave it during the office visit.

It’s literally a lifesaver. We had twins that were born premature, which is a major risk factor. At six months we all got it, and one was miserable but fine, and the other required a relatively non-invasive hospital stay for extra monitoring for a few days.
Given the giant risk factors we had, without the vaccines it would have been a much more scary time, and it was already basically textbook Not-a-great-time.

I feel like I could be persuaded either way, but I lean towards allowing them during sentencing.
I don’t think “it’s an appeal to emotion” is a compelling argument in that context because it’s no longer about establishing truth like the trial is, but about determining punishment and restitution.

Justice isn’t just about the offender or society, it’s also indelibly tied to the victim. Giving them a voice for how they, as the wronged party, would see justice served seems important for it’s role in providing justice, not just the rote application of law.

Obviously you can’t just have the victim decide, but the judges entire job is to ensure fairness, often in the face of strong feelings and contentious circumstances.

Legitimately interested to hear why your opinion is what it is in more detail.

Hearsay is allowed in sentencing statements, and Arizona allows those statements to be in a format of their choice.

It’s the phase of the process where the judge hears opinions on what he should sentence the culprit to, so none of it is evidence or treated as anything other than an emotive statement.

In this case, the sister made two statements: one in the form of a letter where she asked for the maximum sentence, and another in the form of this animation of her brother where she said that he wouldn’t want that and would ask for leniency.

It’s gross, but it’s not the miscarriage of justice that it seems like from first glance. It was accepted in the same way a poem titled “what my brother would say to you” would be.

Reading a bit more, during the sentencing phase in that state people making victim impact statements can choose their format for expression, and it’s entirely allowed to make statements about what other people would say. So the judge didn’t actually have grounds to deny it.
No jury during that phase, so it’s just the judge listening to free form requests in both directions.

It’s gross, but the rules very much allow the sister to make a statement about what she believes her brother would have wanted to say, in whatever format she wanted.

Jessica Gattuso, the victim’s right attorney that worked with Pelkey’s family, told 404 Media that Arizona’s laws made the AI testimony possible. “We have a victim’s bill of rights,” she said. “[Victims] have the discretion to pick what format they’d like to give the statement. So I didn’t see any issues with the AI and there was no objection. I don’t believe anyone thought there was an issue with it.”

Gattuso said she understood the concerns, but felt that Pelkey’s AI avatar was handled deftly. “Stacey was up front and the video itself…said it was AI generated. We were very careful to make sure it was clear that these were the words that the family believed Christopher would have to say,” she said. “At no point did anyone try to pass it off as Chris’ own words.”

The prosecution against Horcasitas was only seeking nine years for the killing. The maximum was 10 and a half years. Stacey had asked the judge for the full sentence during her own impact statement. The judge granted her request, something Stacey credits—in part—to the AI video.

From a different article quoting a former judge in the court:

“There are going to be critics, but they picked the right forum to do it. In a trial with a jury you couldn’t do it, but with sentencing, everything is open, hearsay is admissible, both sides can get up and express what they want to do,” McDonald said.

“The power of it was that the judge had to see the gentleness, the kindness, the feeling of sincerity and having his sister say, ‘Well we don’t agree with it, this is what he would’ve wanted the court to know’,” he said.

I don’t like it, and it feels dirty to me, but since the law allows them to express basically whatever they want in whatever format they want during this phase, it doesn’t seem harmful in this case, just gross.

I actually think it’s a little more gross that the family was able to be that forthright and say that the victim would not want what they were asking for, and still ask for it.

It says in the article that the judge gave the maximum sentence.

The sister who created the video gave a statement as herself asking for something different from what she believed her brother would have wanted, which she chose to express in this fashion.

I don’t think it was a good thing to do, but it’s worth noting that the judges statement is basically “that was a beautiful statement, and he seemed like a good man”, not an application of leniency.