Off topic, but I’d love a good travel agent: someone who would help me cut through all the SEO and slop reviews to find the good hotels, tours, etc., and take care of booking and logistics.

We’ve used some location-specific agencies that have been really good to work with, but you first have to find them. I’d happily pay a premium to someone who would work globally. Do such things exist?

If it's not niche service, it won't be what you are looking for. The best thing is to search for "my travel destination travel agent" and find a local company which is not overly difficult. I have friends who did not even think anybody booked a major trip in a different way than that. There are also travel agents who work in many locations, but specialize in a specific type of trip like adventure/extreme trips etc. It's a different fit though, they can't know each area as well as a local agent.

A friend started that type of business in my country a few years ago (end covid): she is pretty successful and I gave her a chance for a trip I am on now. It mostly exposed how absolutely terrible everyone seems to be at this: she did absolutely lazy work I could have done fast(er) and better myself (usually do and will do again), but, seeing her other clients, including a friend, it seems most people are just really bad at it, far worse than she is (or wants to spend time on I guess).

There is a subset of society who assumes by default people are good at their titles.

Don’t ask me how those people are still being born, it don’t make a ton of sense to me.

Sure, just stumble through SEO and reviews to find them!

You can still hire personal assistants to do grunt work like that

But how are you ever going to find a halfway-competent personal assistant for the occasional bounded task like that?

I need someone to spend a few days every couple of years to plan a holiday, not someone who is available several hours a day to read my emails for me.

Resourceful people who can read quickly are similarly competent at both of these tasks.

Holy crap.

I remember a sign in our dorm bathroom that read, “toilet cam is for research purposes only”. It was a joke, but always got a nice reaction from new people in the building.

But they actually sell this?! And want to charge me for it!?

Holy crap!

They want to charge you $600 for it, plus a $7/mo subscription.

The Dekoda should come with this sticker Aus hygienischen Gründen wird diese Toilette videoüberwacht

https://shop.digitalcourage.de/digitalcourage-und-ccc-aufkle...

Unless your data is really unusual, I’d generally recommend that you avoid writing your own query language and processor: it’s just damn hard to make it work well. Instead, look at how to put something like DuckDB in front of your data so people can just write SQL.

Or a step up from that: build a compiler that converts queries in a human-friendly or application-specific language to SQL or something similar.

Why is it my job to train the machines?

If you would kindly consult your Human HR Universal Handbook (2025 Edition) and navigate to section 226.8.2F, you’ll be gently reminded that it’s the responsibility of any and all employees to train their replacements.

Where can I find a copy?

Please consult your Human HR Universal Handbook (2025 Edition) on how to request a new copy of the Human HR Universal Handbook (2025 Edition). I believe it's in Volume III Section 9912.64.1 or thereabouts.

Typically, these sorts of things are located in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard'.

So, it makes sense to always start there.

you have to steal it from the HR department. They do have a copy but they won't tell you.

Human Human Resources?

The Synthetic Human Resources Universal Handbook is in a binary format which is not understood by Organics, but seems to be useful sometimes.

don't you care about maximizing Googles ROI?

> Last year, a study found that 4.5% of all bitcoin mining was taking place in Iran...

So there is that.

But the story ultimately looks entirely based on a tweet [1] from an official that Google translates as:

> This week, the first official import order registration with #currency_currency worth 10 million dollars was successfully completed. By the end of September, the use of cryptocurrencies and smart contracts will be widespread in foreign trade with target countries.

So I agree that the story is pretty thin.

[1] https://twitter.com/peymanpak_ir/status/1556927239907835904

Here mining's legality is still unclear. A lot of individuals mine bitcoin but illegally not because mining per say is illegal but because for example they mine in their farms using the cheap electricity that is being given to them for the purpose of producing crops and when government finds them I assume also takes the bitcoin they have mined.

That's just not true, though. I say that without taking a position on the merits of jury nullification.

Juries are generally charged with determining matters of fact; the judge matters of law. Even without jury nullification, a jury still determines whether the person performed a proscribed act, or did so with the requisite intent, etc.

When people talk about jury nullification, they generally mean the act of a jury actually believing that the person committed the act, but let them off because they don't think they should be punished for some other reason.

> Juries are generally charged with determining matters of fact; the judge matters of law.

I've always found this deeply troubling. If the law isn't clear enough for 12 jurors to determine if an act was legal, then how is it possibly just to hold the accused liable transgressing it?

I don't see much practical difference between this and ex-post facto laws. In both cases, a person can be convicted for an act that wasn't obviously illegal at the time.

It's not a matter of determining the law; more often than not it's determining who is lying.

Sometimes this is relatively easy ("you left blood with your DNA at the scene") and sometimes hard (you have 3 eyewitnesses, they have 7 people claiming an alibi).

> Sometimes this is relatively easy ("you left blood with your DNA at the scene")

Not so easy when you realize that DNA labs are shockingly prone to making type II errors.

And other problems with sampling: There’s the famous case of the “Phantom von Heilbronn”, where the same DNA was found on 40 unrelated crime scenes in multiple countries. In the end, it was found to belong to a worker in the factory that made the swabs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn

There was hopeless alcoholic in San Hoser who was arrested for murdering a businessman in Palo Alto. Turned out the same paramedic that helped take him to the hospital earlier in the day also was called to the scene of the murder. Some how DNA from hopeless drunk guy ended up under the fingernails of the victim.

It is true.

The only way to preclude jury nullification is to infringe on the rights of the jury as the sole determiners of fact, as you put it.

Without adding another non-jury body that can overrule the jury on what actually happened, how can you ever get rid of the possibility of jury nullification?

In the US, judges can overturn jury verdicts. That will be appealed to a higher court (which means they need a REALLY good reason to do it).

The most common place for this to happen is in civil court. A jury can come back with "11ty billion dollars" and the judge can decide "Ok, they got a little overzealous with that, $100".

Is there a case in the US where a jury found the defendant not guilty in criminal court and the judge overturned that?

The judge can effectively overturn a "guilty" verdict but cannot overturn a "not guilty" because of double-jeopardy (though I suppose a judge could force/rule a mistrial).

In civil cases, juries often are in charge of determining damages.

So all those movies where juries find the defendant guilty or not guilty are wrong?

> Juries are generally charged with determining matters of fact

If that is axiomatic, it's not the constitution of the US. I don't know about other jurisdictions, but it's silent on the exact duties of a jury.

I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the idea that juries are for matters of fact comes from English common law. The constitution is a rather barebones framework. There is a lot that it doesn't cover.

I agree with the OP, but also you to some extent. I think juries are a paradox. It doesn't make sense to use them as they're intended. The only way it makes sense is with nullification, in my opinion.

Jury nullification is ignoring the law for any reason. In fact, it seems like the normal, "classical" interpretation is to find not guilty to laws you don't agree with. It's also used for people that did it, but the jury sympathizes with them. Otherwise, it could be they think the penalties are just unfair.

All of these things are jury nullification.

I think the point is that if you're just trying to determine if the letter of a law was violated (and are not concerning yourself with justice), there isn't much reason to believe that a jury of your (untrained) peers is going to better at that job than one (trained) judge (or even a panel of say 3 judges).

I learn everything I need from Ted talks.