I've been reading articles suggesting that AI use alters ways of thinking. Humans certainly adapt to the tools they use. If this is true, and what a huge caveat that is, then the divergence in ways humans think: AI using and non-AI using will be interesting to watch. Although it will probably be decades before any significant conclusions are reached.
I find your Amish example is striking and accurate.
I stayed a couple of months at a place that listed laundry facilities that turned out to be a couple of deep sinks with a built in wash board. I didn't find it physically difficult but it was very boring work. Key lesson I learned, don't use more soap than necessary. Excessive soap just increases the time spent rinsing.
If I understand correctly, most solar panels operating optimally around 77F,25C. They decrease in efficiency at higher temperatures. "For every degree Celsius above 25°C, a solar panel’s efficiency typically drops by about 0.3% to 0.5%, depending on the specific panel." So, when it gets around 38C that's maybe 6% less efficient. Not a huge decrease, but something to consider when building your desert solar farm.
Yes, I always find it very useful to condemn the mosquitoes when someone is bitten. If they aren't heartily condemned, they will be legitimized and emboldened.
The evil victim blamers say "why was she wearing that short skirt?" They don't realize that the mosquitoes are sexist, and that we can and should eliminate all of the mosquitoes so she can wear what she wants.
I checked mine on Amazon Japan's site. While it had some categories: height, weight, age, fit attributes, and shoe sizes: nothing was populated.
I can only guess that there's hidden information that indicates I'm extremely privacy conscious. But it could be possible that information is populated by cookies which I don't allow.
I'd be hesitant to give any app any sort of access to my checking account. I would only do so with a second account with just enough there to cover my purchase. While it is a nuisance, the phone is simply too large of an attack vector to consider anything else.
I hope to move to Mercury Bank soon, which allows you to create a (practically) unlimited number of checking accounts without additional verification, including for cases just like these. Just need to find another job to afford the fee ($240/yr)
From Mercury’s own website
“ Get up to $5M FDIC insurance through our partner banks and their sweep networks to ensure eligible deposits are protected.”
That's exactly the point though. Mercury is not a bank. So giving them your money and getting it back safely relies upon the partner institution.
As an example: fintech builds front end that takes deposits from user, but not much more. The deposit passes to an intermediary that pools deposits and puts them in FBO accounts at a real (FDIC) bank. Intermediary collapses. Now neither the bank nor the fintech know who had what.
This is exactly what happened when Synapse collapsed (which impacted Mercury at the time too)[0]
Everybody with access to, or capable of guessing, your account number is capable of "access to your checking account".
Are ACH returns really that difficult to initiate in the US? I've fortunately never had to do one, but in SEPA land, it's usually a single click in online banking, or at worst a simple message to customer support.
While true that all you need is the account's MICR number and the bank's routing number, you also need access to the ACH network which I assume is only open to other banks and their official clearing partners and their services such as Zelle.
Fraudulent ACH transactions would be a federal crime if you found a pathway to do them, and you'd probably be tracked down pretty quickly because unlike crypto, ACH transactions are fully trackable and auditable between accounts that have identified owners.
Yet ACH fraud happens. Not all merchants originating ACH debit transfers verify their customers as diligently.
To be clear, this fraud happens similarly to credit card fraud: Fraudster F gets accountholder A's account and routing number, opens an account with merchant M and racks up a bill; M charges A, A reports an unauthorized payment to their bank. Usually M ends up eating the loss.
> Everybody with access to, or capable of guessing, your account number is capable of "access to your checking account".
No, ACH authorisation is an entirely different matter. I could agree to show you the check I wrote to my landlord, but I'm not willing to give you my check book with my signature — and no other data — on all the blank checks.
ACH authorisation is an analog of the latter, not the former.
Nobody verifies ACH authorizations for non-disputed payments though. Your account and routing number is really everything anyone needs to debit your account.
You can then easily dispute them, but I'd still call that "access to your account".
This isn't some big unknown experiment played out globally with no way of going back. Aedes aegypti has been successfully eliminated in a number of countries over a long time span. No country to date has ever reported unplanned consequences from eliminating Aedes aegypti. Guess what, if there are consequences, Aedes aegypti can easily be reintroduced into the local ecology. Mosquitos it turns out breed voraciously especially when encouraged.
I enjoyed the article, lots of good advice centered around contact lists. But in my humble opinion, the best strategy is to take steps to avoid needing an emergency contact list.
TLDR for this link is that they release male mosquitoes carrying a bacteria called Wolbachia. So this only affects the one species of mosquito they're targeting: Aedes aegypti.
I find your Amish example is striking and accurate.
reply