A strictly logical clock for a 24-hour day would have 0 at the top with 1 on the right and 23 on the left. And it would be only ever set to UTC.
NateNate60
I do have to admit though, most of the stuff on this page is actually pretty funny in that it's exactly 100% what one would expect a Trump diss page on Democrats to look like and say with absolutely all the typical Trump-style trashiness presented as the pinnacle of class.
In terms of their utility as a cleaning tool, scrub daddies are actually quite good at what they do. They're somewhat more expensive but remarkably worth the money.
If I had to guess this guy (or girl) is a Bitcoin millionaire or something. But that's just based on the vibes of his speech with no concrete basis.
Question: how does this site differ in function to the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine?
According to the article, they're selling it for ¥97 billion but will lease it back, so they will post a ¥73.9 billion gain from the sale. But in the first half of 2025, they posted a loss of ¥221.9 billion. So selling their HQ will offset about two months' worth of losses.
Hours are Monday to Friday 00:00 to 23:59. Responsibilities include learning tricks and doing typical lively human activities like Fortnite dances and TikTok challenges. Benefits package includes comprehensive health care, dental, vision, etc. Company-provided room and board for life. No retirement options though.
Sea World is like if aliens confined a human to an office cubicle and called it "City World"
A perfectly free market? No, it doesn't and never will exist. A mostly-free market which, with appropriate nudging, emulates 90% of the behaviour of the market that appears in an economic textbook? That does exist or can exist and we can manipulate it to our benefit
The concern is that AI data centres use far too much electricity. A joule is a joule regardless of whether it is consumed in a building with the Amazon logo on it, or in a server room located in a former janitor's closet in a company's offices.
Hell, even a 0.1¢ tax would be effective.
I think this could be elegantly solved by saying that (1) anyone who controls the computer system which executes a prompt for a large language model or image generator is liable to pay a tax of one-tenth cent per prompt, and (2) any organisation or person who would pay less than [$/€]100 a year in this tax is exempt from paying. This means anyone can use their own computing resources to run up to 100,000 tax-free prompts, so hobbyists and organisations that have AI but use it only sparingly as needed would not pay any tax, but any organisation which either spams AI or lets users spam AI would be taxed quite heavily. Besides, those people are already charged retail rates for electricity so they are already penalised in the form of high power bills if they waste electricity on AI nonsense.
Google handles 5 trillion searches per year, so if they want to provide every single user with an AI summary then they would need to cough up $5 billion a year in AI tax, which is a ludicrous amount. That would single-handedly fund the US green energy transition If they actually did that. A solar panel on every roof and a wind turbine in every garden. If users really want to use the AI then Google can charge them for it, maybe by requiring that they subscribe to their Google One thing or something. Either way, fewer people choose to use AI, Google profits from those that do, less misinformation from AI hallucinations, and less energy wasted on garbage AI prompting. Everyone wins.

Ah yes, the Trump starvation agenda.