For who might be pulled in by the vague title, not knowing what a nostr is, thinking this article has anything to do with evolution - it has nothing to do with evolution or nature. Not one example of nature trying to evolve a nostr is descibed.

Maybe like... the author thought a nostr is similar to, I dunno, a pack or tribe or something?

It's clearly a tongue in cheek joke about the progression of projects with similar goals that reach imperfect outcomes, with the implicit assumption that Nostr represents the ideal solution.

There was a “nature keeps evolving crabs” meme that was floating around a while back, I think it is a reference to that. I was also disappointed by the lack of nature, evolution, and crabs in the article.

Nature has successfully evolved an Israeli Nostr: almost every mammal has at least one nostr.il

I thought the journal Nature was doing some decentrailized publishing thing.

I mean, i thought it was pretty clear - its a using convergent evolution as a metaphor for recenr developments in distributed apps.

(Whether the author is convincing on the other hand...)

I think the point is that private owners might run into the same issue of needing to cross private land to get to their private parcel.

I understood the situation here to be that the same private owner owned all of the private squares in this particular area. I would assume that most private owners won't be interested in buying squares deep in the checkerboard for access reasons.

There are also public roads cutting through fairly regularly in these areas.

I wonder if they really have all that much value now. Barring any particularly lucrative natural resources, if one publically owned square is surrounded by private owners, who have the right to restrict travel, then that kind of heavily limits the market, doesn't it? And by that, presumably the price is limited as well.

I think the comment points to the other possible motivation - undo everything that was done under the Biden admin out of principle/spite.

And tell everyone that it's to get rid of DEI or something, because thats how much you respect your voters' intelligence.

I ran into this problem on a Slimbook some years ago now. I found that my battery drained way too fast in standby, and I remember determining that this was some (relatively common) problem with sleep states, that some linux machines couldn't really enter/stay in a deeper sleep state, so my Slimbook's standby wasn't much of a standby at all.

But that's just one problem, I bet.

I'm sure they don't think exposing adultery is inherently bad, but rather that the method employed feels like an excessive violation of privacy.

If you'd like a different example, imagine a man is angry that his ex wife is with someone else now, and uses such a service to figure out where he can find the pair.

> The fact that people are unimpressed that we can have a fluent conversation with a super smart AI that can generate any image/video is mindblowing to me.

The image and video generation capabilities of AI is the most unimpressive part of AI's! It's the LLM's that are the most inpressive. Those might, just might, even make some sense in an OS, since plenty of people are happy to outsource a quick email or script to AI. Hell, what if your OS had a built-in AI to troubleshoot bugs for you? That might even conceivably be an improvement.

> Over in the comments, some users pushed back on the CEO's use of the word "unimpressed," arguing that it's not the technology itself that fails to impress them, but rather Microsoft's tendency to put AI into everything just to appease shareholders instead of focusing on the issues that most users actually care about, like making Windows' UI more user-friendly similar to how it was in Windows 7, fixing security problems, and taking user privacy more seriously.

I'm sure adding AI to Windows would make privacy problems even worse. Not to mention agentic AI could create a whole new class of security problems if not implemented carefully.

Are they going to do age verification? And how?

The only way I can think of would effectively require identity verification as well.

Then they will say it's broken and demand digital ID to 'fix' it.

The law speifically reuired non-ID methods

> Specifies that no Australian will be compelled to use government identification (including Digital ID) to prove their age online, and platforms must offer reasonable alternatives to users,

> Establishes robust privacy protections, placing limitations on the use of information collected by platforms for the purposes of satisfying the minimum age obligation, and requiring the destruction of information following its use

https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/docume...

Roblox has already begun to roll something out. I’m anticipating about 6-12 months we’ll start hearing news about privacy concerns and all these photos of children have been leaked.

> What’s really the health trade-off compared to having to monitor every tiny little thing

I'd say that there's sure a health benefit for continuing studies on microplastics. Even if they're difficult to conduct, it's probably a good idea to learn more aboht microplastics and health because, barring some new way to remove microplastics, it seems likely that the ambient concentration of them will only increase in the future.

This post is somewhat related and always makes me chuckle:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43929724