This Eliezer Yudkowsky. He wrote a bunch of nerd fanfiction, and is apparently mostly famous for his takes on AI. He is a public figure.

A is David Koresh, of the bracnh davidians/waco seige.

Innovative ideas are rarely smart ideas.

You completely missed the point there, damn. He's saying those things are very likely to be bad investments.

Texas.

"You're weird for not being interested in me" is the same thing, yes.

Telling someone they're an alien for not being interested in you is very definitely rude. Sure, you put effort into your appearance, you have pride in your looks. There's nothing wrong with that. It's when you take that rejection out on someone else that it becomes a problem. Here, it's a mild issue, almost certainly intended to be a fourth wall wink at the readers more than anything else, but at the end of the day, she called clark an alien because he turned her advances down.

It's very much a metaphorical comment for her; normal men, according to her worldview, obviously check out womans titties every chance they get. She's being incredibly rude and arrogant. "If he's not checking me out, he very obviously has serious mental health problems, or is just straight up not human." The arrogant half is the expectation that even if a normal man had the capability to ignore some other woman's titties, no normal man would ever be able to ignore hers.

She would likely consider gay men to be an aberration too.

Right up until they do, and spend 10 minutes checking to make sure you weren't hurt or otherwise injured at their party. This is fine for big public things, but is very much a dick move for smaller groups.

If you're really worried about power use, you could switch to an itx motherboard with an soc laptop chip in it.

He probably killed himself because

Using someones suicide to preach about your own personal cause is a dick move.

I have no doubt about that. The virginity part was what dated this specific iteration of it.

Now there's a throwback to '90s/early internet humor.

Yeah, it goes through the emergency call system, but just connecting the wires and leaving the dcm box alone is supposed to fix it. I have the forum post saved if you wanna look; https://www.toyotanation.com/threads/how-do-i-locate-the-dcm-telematics-unit-on-a-2020-corolla.1693507/#post-14400614

The car mic and one of the right side speakers stopped working. The ota updates also stopped arriving, and toyota stopped sending me emails about where my car had been / how long it was driven. The emergency button which calls the toyota help line is also broken now.

There were no warnings from my car at all after i pulled the fuse.

There's some forum posts about rewiring the speaker back into the system - apparently you only need an extra plug, a little bit of wiring skills, and access through the glove box to get it working again. I havent personally done it yet, but ill get around to it at some point.

There is. On my toyota it was called the DCM telematics module. Had its own fuse so it was super easy to disable.

Yeah, to secure a military vehicle in a lot, they use a regular padlock. Guarantee a key is lost every quarter, and the unit in charge has to go out and cut it to get access to their own vehicle. This guy came in with bolt cutters, and then used the combat lock on the door he entered in. The only possible way a policeman without heavy ordnance got in with boltcutter, and the thief used a combat lock, was if there was another door that was padlocked closed, but not combat locked.

Tldr; yeah, you can still steal a military vehicle if you can sneak into an army base with a pair of boltcutters. It sure as shit won't be loaded, and if you pick the wrong one it might not even start up because they all breakdown regularly, and aren't clearly marked as such.

Visually lossless means I couldn't tell an image difference even when pixel peeping with imgsli. Good enough means I couldn't tell a difference in video, but could occasionally see a compression artifact in imgsli.

The VMAF results are purely objective measurements. You can read more about it here; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VideoMultimethodAssessmentFusion

I consider the 'good enough' level to be, if I didn't pixel peep, I couldn't tell the difference. The visually lossless levels were the first crf levels where I couldn't tell a quality difference even when pixel peeping with imgsli. I also included VAMF results, which say that the quality loss levels are all the same at a pixel level.

I know that av1, x264, and x265 all have different ways of compressing video. Obviously, the whole point of this was to get a better idea of what that actually looked like. Everything on the visually lossless section is completely indistinguishable to my eyes, and everything on the good enough section has very minor bits of compression only noticed when i'm looking for it in a still image. This does not require the same codec to compare and contrast with.

Frankly, for anything other than real-time encoding, I don't actually consider encoding time to be a huge deal. None of my encodes were slower than 3fps on my 5800x3d, which is plenty for running on my media server as overnight job. For real-time encoding, I would just grab a Intel Arc card, and redo the whole thing since the bitrates will be different anyways.

From my blogpost, i'm using the following command to encode the video;

 undefined

    
ffmpeg -i source.2160p.mkv
-map 0:v:0
-map -0:a -map -0:s -map_metadata -1
-c:v libsvtav1
-preset 3
-vf scale=w=1920:-2
-crf 23
dest.1080p.av1.mkv