I think my car key would be the thing in my pockets that I'm the least likely to misplace. It's only ever in like one of three places.

This appears to be the simplest and safest solution.

"Just don't lose them" isn't really a solution. Humans make mistakes and occasionally leave them in pockets, drop inside couch cushions, etc. Especially if kids are involved.

Doesn't the same apply for the phone though?

Some things in life need to be treated as tools to accomplish a goal. We don't have the mental capacity to develop an understanding of everything in the modern world, so we specialise instead.

It's no different from someone seeing their car as just a tool to get from A to B. That might be an understandable mindset for people on HN, whereas people at a car meet might find something off about that mindset.

Not to mention, sacrifice can come in many forms. The simplest example is, the time required to learn something or develop a skill. As long as people want to pursue things just out of interest, that's not going away.

(Unless we find a way to download the information directly into our brains, I suppose.)

It may not be relevant from your perspective, but yours isn't the only one. Others will find this detail useful or insightful, for any number of reasons.

So, why? Because details matter.

It is as useful as saying that attackers used Kali Linux - no details of what was actually exploited, just blaming some random tool.

They aren’t blaming a random tool, where do you see blame? For you this information may not be relevant but for many people in the cybersecurity sector it’s very relevant and helps put these frameworks into the spotlight. Sharing knowledge is not a bad thing.

Well as the song goes, I want it AT way.

They'd probably also get some comparisons to the Phoebus cartel.

There's a Triticum turgidum var. mirabile, which sounds like it might be the variety he found.

According to an article I found from 1951[0], it used to be popular in the Mediterranean, and the seeds can germinate after long periods of storage.

I also tried to look at the wheat in the picture, but not the highest resolution, and it looks like it might be more than one variety, which he did mention. But at least some of the heads resemble the mirabile variety.

[0]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4118021

Mirabile (admirable) and miracolo (miracle) are similar words but with different meanings.

I did notice that too, but it's kinda beside the point.

There's a joke in here somewhere about machinists.

It's a reference to your basic 'Baton Roue' meme.

I assume it's meant to represent the perspective of pro-AI people, but it's ambiguous.

The 'b' sound is a plosive too, by the way. It's voiced, vs the voiceless 'k'.

But the place of articulation kinda flips, from rear consonant/front vowel (kiki), to front consonant/rear vowel (bouba).

If you flipped the voicing, it'd be 'gigi' vs 'poupa', which to my ears at least, is a lot less clear cut.

> The 'b' sound is a plosive too, by the way. It's voiced, vs the voiceless 'k'.

Yeah this I know, by "bouba" being opposite I meant the waveform.

Really the phonetic terms here are not actually relevant and have betrayed me. It's more that the 'k' sound is "more [ex]plosive" in that it seems to build up more pressure and turbulence (probably as you say, because the consonant is in the rear, so pressure builds and bounces around in the mouth more, whereas the "b" just mostly blasts out the front more quickly). And the "k" surely has a more peaky / spikey waveform in the audible range.

If you, or anyone else reading, is interested in playing around with this stuff, there's an open source program called Praat[0]. I assume it still is the go-to in linguistics for making spectrograms, it was back when I was studying it, at least.

There's probably nicer programs that can do the same thing, aimed at people like musicians, but they won't have the phonetics-specific guides and help online.

There's also a large archive of speech recordings from a wide range of languages hosted by UCLA[1], which you can download and play around with. There might be newer archives now, but I remember this one, because Peter Ladefoged wrote the proverbial book on introductory phonetics.

Linguistics generally aligns quite pro-copyleft, so there will be a lot of freely available stuff online.

[0]: https://praat.org/ [1]: https://archive.phonetics.ucla.edu/

Anecdotally, 'its' sans apostrophe will be automatically "corrected" by my phone.

On the bright side, this has finally given me the push to disable auto-correction.

Yikes.

And right on about disabling auto-correction.