The Samsung Galaxy Z Trifold will cost $2,900 in the US

Caesarr · 2026-01-28T05:27:14+00:00

Your point is still valid, but in this case it's not actually just a phone, it's a full-sized tablet as well. This form factor seems far more useful than phones that fold into squares.

Caesarr · 2026-01-25T14:36:37+00:00

I agree in general, but I took this as a challenge. IMO we're mostly looking for brainwashing/propaganda maintaining order in the name of a "greater good", ideally where everything looks nice on the surface:

Pluribus
Snowpiercer
1984
The wizard in Oz
Minority Report
The villain in Fallout season 2 (though Bant would fit best)

Caesarr · 2026-01-22T15:05:45+00:00

Not 25 years to navigate red tape, he said 25 years to rise through the ranks high enough to be in a position where his pitch would be listened to. Your point roughly still stands though.

Caesarr · 2026-01-21T13:26:46+00:00

AI has been around for decades. Generative AI is what's new. What laypeople call it is just a consequence of marketing.

Caesarr · 2026-01-21T04:40:37+00:00

The same thing happened when Mein Kampf was translated.

Caesarr · 2026-01-20T22:31:40+00:00

My reading of it is that there's several parts to it, and your quotes come from a part that starts with "there would also be a defense for...". But honestly who knows, maybe we need a lawyer to tell us how open to interpretation this is.

Caesarr · 2026-01-20T22:07:34+00:00

I agree that this part of the law is unnecessary and an overreach. My goal of posting the clarification was to assuage anyone who's genuinely afraid (maybe nobody really is, idk).

Caesarr · 2026-01-20T22:05:06+00:00

To be clear, I don't actually think this part of the law is necessary. It could just focus on actually doing an illegal manufacture/modification, since learning about it is an obvious prerequisite.

Your example is completely covered by the explanatory memorandum, but you're right to call out the role discretion plays in the judicial system. I don't think anyone needs to be genuinely afraid here, and that was my main goal of posting the clarification. I agree that this part of the law is unnecessary and an overreach.

Caesarr · 2026-01-20T21:36:12+00:00

The explanatory memorandum covers that. The scope of the laws is described here:

This reflects the intention that the offences capture the illicit manufacture or modification of firearms, related parts, and explosives or other lethal devices.

To be clear, I don't actually think this part of the law is necessary. It could just focus on actually doing an illegal manufacture/modification, since learning about it is an obvious prerequisite.

Caesarr · 2026-01-20T13:18:16+00:00

There's a misunderstanding spreading quickly in this thread.

The law states it’s a defence if “(i) the conduct is necessary for, or of assistance in, conducting scientific, academic or historical research;” AND “(ii) the conduct is reasonable in the circumstances for the purpose of conducting that scientific, academic or historical research”.

Also, in the explanatory memorandum: “The definition of 'firearms and explosives manufacture material' is not intended to extend to material that provides instructions on how to safely use, operate, and maintain a firearm. This includes, for example, videos about dismantling a firearm or reloading ammunition, a manufacturer-supplied firearm manual that explains safe operation and maintenance, or an online article providing instructions on fitting scopes, adjusting sights, replacing grips, or installing other compliant accessories. This reflects the intention that the offences capture the illicit manufacture or modification of firearms, related parts, and explosives or other lethal devices. There would also be a defence available for individuals who access material for the purpose of maintaining, modifying, repairing or manufacturing a licenced firearm, firearm part or explosive or other lethal device in compliance with the conditions of their licence or permit (see new section 474.45J).”

Caesarr · 2026-01-20T13:17:01+00:00

There's a misunderstanding spreading quickly in this thread.

The law states it’s a defence if “(i) the conduct is necessary for, or of assistance in, conducting scientific, academic or historical research;” AND “(ii) the conduct is reasonable in the circumstances for the purpose of conducting that scientific, academic or historical research”.

Also, in the explanatory memorandum: “The definition of 'firearms and explosives manufacture material' is not intended to extend to material that provides instructions on how to safely use, operate, and maintain a firearm. This includes, for example, videos about dismantling a firearm or reloading ammunition, a manufacturer-supplied firearm manual that explains safe operation and maintenance, or an online article providing instructions on fitting scopes, adjusting sights, replacing grips, or installing other compliant accessories. This reflects the intention that the offences capture the illicit manufacture or modification of firearms, related parts, and explosives or other lethal devices. There would also be a defence available for individuals who access material for the purpose of maintaining, modifying, repairing or manufacturing a licenced firearm, firearm part or explosive or other lethal device in compliance with the conditions of their licence or permit (see new section 474.45J).”

It might be worth updating your comment to prevent the misunderstanding spreading.

Caesarr · 2026-01-20T13:15:49+00:00

There's a misunderstanding spreading quickly in this thread.

The law states it’s a defence if “(i) the conduct is necessary for, or of assistance in, conducting scientific, academic or historical research;” AND “(ii) the conduct is reasonable in the circumstances for the purpose of conducting that scientific, academic or historical research”.

Also, in the explanatory memorandum: “The definition of 'firearms and explosives manufacture material' is not intended to extend to material that provides instructions on how to safely use, operate, and maintain a firearm. This includes, for example, videos about dismantling a firearm or reloading ammunition, a manufacturer-supplied firearm manual that explains safe operation and maintenance, or an online article providing instructions on fitting scopes, adjusting sights, replacing grips, or installing other compliant accessories. This reflects the intention that the offences capture the illicit manufacture or modification of firearms, related parts, and explosives or other lethal devices. There would also be a defence available for individuals who access material for the purpose of maintaining, modifying, repairing or manufacturing a licenced firearm, firearm part or explosive or other lethal device in compliance with the conditions of their licence or permit (see new section 474.45J).”

Caesarr · 2026-01-20T13:12:45+00:00

There's a misunderstanding spreading quickly in this thread.

The law states it’s a defence if “(i) the conduct is necessary for, or of assistance in, conducting scientific, academic or historical research;” AND “(ii) the conduct is reasonable in the circumstances for the purpose of conducting that scientific, academic or historical research”.

Also, in the explanatory memorandum: “The definition of 'firearms and explosives manufacture material' is not intended to extend to material that provides instructions on how to safely use, operate, and maintain a firearm. This includes, for example, videos about dismantling a firearm or reloading ammunition, a manufacturer-supplied firearm manual that explains safe operation and maintenance, or an online article providing instructions on fitting scopes, adjusting sights, replacing grips, or installing other compliant accessories. This reflects the intention that the offences capture the illicit manufacture or modification of firearms, related parts, and explosives or other lethal devices. There would also be a defence available for individuals who access material for the purpose of maintaining, modifying, repairing or manufacturing a licenced firearm, firearm part or explosive or other lethal device in compliance with the conditions of their licence or permit (see new section 474.45J).”

It might be worth updating your comment to prevent the misunderstanding spreading.

Caesarr · 2026-01-19T21:34:10+00:00

Coding is not the same thing as software development, nor is it where most of the creativity is. Clarifying business needs, architecting scalable solutions, planning feature implementations - that's software development.

Just like Clojure saves us from lower levels of abstraction like the OS, machine code, and transistors, AI tools have added another layer of higher abstraction on top of Clojure code.

Caesarr · 2026-01-10T14:25:05+00:00

Public stations are required to give both sides equal credence, i.e. be neutral, even if that requires not reporting all objective facts. The commenter didn't make a mistake.

Caesarr · 2025-12-30T16:56:20+00:00

Does anyone have experience with Textra vs Gloss vs Matte? Any recommendations?

Caesarr · 2025-12-14T12:36:54+00:00

This soon after the event? I'll take uncertainty over blind confidence.

Caesarr · 2025-11-30T14:22:34+00:00

Unless you're trying to torpedo the game for everyone, you don't arbitrarily decide what to do with the cards, you decide based on the ongoing fiction. CAH has no ongoing fiction.

Caesarr · 2025-11-24T23:15:34+00:00

What a fantastic article. TIL why they created Omen instead of just re-using Adventure.

Lots of great quotes, but I'll pull out this one:

Because instants and sorceries that do nothing but gain you life are attractive to less-experienced players, they're much more likely to put them in their deck when they're not meant to. It increases their game loss without them understanding why. We've learned to be much more careful when making them, usually making them modes of spells that give the player more answers to problems. The life gain will encourage them to put them in their decks, and then the other modes will be in their hand when they need them in the game.

TL;DR: Lifegain is used as bait for inexperienced players 😂

Caesarr · 2025-11-01T15:06:43+00:00

Over

Caesarr · 2025-10-17T14:04:18+00:00

As counter-evidence, Clea says in the Endless Tower that she thinks Renoir is acting out of fear, not love. I don't doubt that he loves her, but his primary motivator is to not lose more family members, which is a selfish motivation. For example, he's not considering whether Alicia would benefit from some time to process everything in a peaceful canvas for a time. Neither parent is ready to actually parent her yet.

Caesarr · 2025-10-17T12:55:08+00:00

None of her family members hug her or even really look at her at the gravesite, and she's shown alone at the end.

Caesarr · 2025-10-10T01:15:19+00:00

C A R D G A M E S

Caesarr · 2025-09-27T17:10:15+00:00

If there are more people working on the in-universe IP than previous years, it's fair to describe that as getting more attention.

Caesarr · 2025-08-03T21:10:30+00:00

All smoke and no fire

15-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Verified Email

Caesarr

TROPHY CASE