"tags": {
    "title": "Kubernetes Roofspin",
    "artist": "prafff",
    "comment": "made with suno; created=2026-06-08T23:11:09.140Z; id=793ca281-38c3-4cfd-96d3-ad3e82a46157",

  ffprobe -v quiet -print_format json -show_format -show_streams used-to-be-hard.mp3

Because the competition is already fierce. There's MS Flight Simulator and X-Plane on the commercial side, Flightgear on the open source side and geo-fs.com on the free-to-play side.

There is not much Google can actually gain from making their own flight simulator.

Grand Theft Auto is now doing it, but Google Earth would make more sense because it can bring a more realistic environment.

https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1szcl5i/google_...

https://x.company/projects/wing/

In an ideal world, Brazil would have a thriving private sector, capable of competing even in the AI sector. Unfortunately, that’s not the case, and I believe that without government action such endeavors won’t really succeed.

From where I stand, it’s not fair to charge the hell out of people who fall for these tricks while giving steep discounts to the ones who don’t. Maybe there’s a “fool me once” aspect to Ryanair’s shenanigans, so at least their impact might be limited somehow.

Their current pattern is more about playing into the fear of what happens without insurance, without selecting your seat, when you don't pay for early check in and forget to do it online on the day before the flight, or what happens if you show up with more or larger luggage than what you booked. Fears they themselves create with high fees for showing up with too much luggage or for checking in at the airport

There is still a bit of praying on people who are in a hurry or are impatient, don't read the screens and just click the most prominent button. The most obvious is the seat selection. But it's no longer the most prominent way they get you

I remember them being crafty, but I have to admit I was surprised by the level of tactics ... that is to say, what they are still allowed to get away with given European / UK consumer law.

Not to mention that a 20kg bag and hand luggage cost me significantly more than the fare itself. They even had upfront "package deals" that would have actually worked out more expensive - bundles of nonsense benefits.

In Australia most of this kind of borderline deceptive selling has been stepped on, to the point that you hardly see it any more.

One of these sites offered the ticket for dozens of Euros cheaper, and allowed me to go through the booking process until the end: I entered my CC, hit "Buy", and the next page was "Oops, the flight is no longer available at this price. The price now is: [the same price as booking with the airline]. Would you like to complete the purchase with this new price anyway?".

Fucking hell, it pissed me off so much that I said no and booked it with the airline after all.

I'd recommend never ever using reseller agents. They frequently mess up tickets, they sell tickets that don't exist at all, and most of them won't forward your contact info to the airline's system, so if there's a problem or delay you'll never receive the notification from the airline. (Including coupons, hotel room offers in case of cancellation and other stuff)

The airlines may be bad but the resellers are worse.

I've never been stranded when I've contacted the hotel directly, via their website or the phone. Sometimes a glitch does happen, but when it does the hotel will call around on your behalf and find you a room.

Save your points and use them on hotels instead, where the experience is just as risky, but at least fails in a less spectacular way when it goes wrong e.g. unless you're booking with an agent in a high demand area where there are NO hotels you usually can leverage a backup plan a lot easier than if you are stuck in an airport.

So I'll typically use a service like Google Flights to find a flight, pick an itinerary, but then go to the airline's web page to book the flight directly.

Same for hotels. Find a hotel on Expedia, then book with the hotel directly.

I've seen too many horror stories of people booking through a reseller, and if something goes wrong, the reseller tells you to talk to the hotel/airline while the hotel/airline tells you to talk to the reseller.

Yeah most of the EU steps on this but Ireland is deep in the pockets of big tech. Their privacy regulator is really weak for example, on purpose. That's why all the big techs have their HQs there.

I guess this attitude extends to Ryanair too. We have this thing in the EU where companies need to be legislated in only one member state but some like Ireland abuse this privilege for national gain. It's not just Ireland though. Holland facilitates EU tax dodging with them, Malta sells EU passports to rich foreigners etc.

Spain does sometimes still manage to put the thumbscrews on them though. Like banning charging for hand luggage.

Last time I had close call with a slightly oversized backpack (but not overly full so could easily fit) and they pointed out that some straps we're sticking out through the openings in their thing which I had to push back in...

I think they may actually have gotten in trouble for that one; they've stopped doing it (as noted in the article it was from eight years ago).

I don't really have a problem with offering discounts to members of X program, or if insurance is pre-selected.

But the advertised price should be inclusive of everything (taxes, fees, charges, etc) and the price available to the general product before membership-exclusive pricing.

So if you advertise a product for $100 then any normal person can pay $100 and get it for that.

Want to sell it from cheaper to members of your reward program? Go ahead. But it can't be the most prominent price advertised for it.

You want to sell insurance pre-selected? No problem but again the default advertised price needs to include it. Even if they can opt out for a cheaper price.

There are sure to be edge cases. But the point being is that the price you advertise most prominently needs to be the all-inclusive price any member of the public can get without having to fight to select the correct option.

We don't accept misleading and deceptive practices in other areas, why do we let airlines, hotels and hire car places do it?

Religion and politics.

After 32 years of Ryanair in its current incarnation nobody can claim naivety. Dance with the devil and he pipes the tune.

Look, we hate Ryanair, everybody does. The seats are cramped. They keep piping stupid announcements. Dark patterns. Etc. But if we want to see family, it’s Ryanair or another airline. With a family of 3, it’s either 400€ or 900€, so we put up with it.

You’re being unfair.

It used to be pretty easy going if you just paid up for everything you need. I preferred it over the traditional Airlines because with them you have to suffer first before you build enough points for fast boarding etc. With Ryanair you could just pay and if you did you would be given no hassle by the staff. Even onboard food and drink prices were pretty ok.

But recently they've reduced the carryon bag to unusable proportions and their staff is ever ruder and pushy.

I study from reputable sources every day and never cease to be amazed by how many errors or misconceptions they have. Peer-reviewed articles, books from renowned scholars, news from major publications… regardless of the source, false information and contradictions accumulate. I’d wager that AI, besides helping me uncover these issues in the literature, has had a lower error rate than most of the materials that I read on a daily basis.

Surely the number refers to the total users of ChatGPT overall, and the fraction of those who use voice features is considerably smaller, is it not?

That’s the kind of thing that influences business decisions like knowing how much hardware and software optimization to throw at a problem.

Those various caveats there — “value-aligned”, “safety-conscious”, “case-by-case agreements” — probably mean that no project ever will be “worthy” of OpenAI’s assistance.

In the unlikely event that an abiding project appears, then yeah, sure, it’s very probable that OpenAI would assist it :)

But as others have pointed out, there's basically zero margin on simple domain sales. So if you want proper support, you need to go to someone who bundles it with other enterprise business (e.g. AWS), or who makes it their whole business (e.g. MM).

I thought it was weird that for almost the entire 5.3 generation we only had a -codex model, I presume in that case they were seeing the massive AI coding wave this winter and were laser focused on just that for a couple months. Maybe someday someone will actually explain all of this.

The whole “prediction market” charade is increasingly proving to lend itself to abuse. I hope regulations catch up with it soon, otherwise more shenanigans will follow.

This vastly increases the barrier to entry for the normal person though. Is your position that just because laws don't work 100% of the time we shouldn't bother with them?

But wow what a useless way of conversing that is. They asked because it's unclear what you're implying. So could you please clarify if you think regulation would be useful? Or should be done despite being futile? Or shouldn't be done? I can only think of those three answers, is there another?

It is indeed unfortunate that the level of corruption in the current US administration likely precludes any action on it in the current term.

Isn't cryptocurrency (for the most part) very traceable? If you make it too hard and risky for most people to participate in, you'll limit the negative effects. You could probably quite effectively discourage it by sanctioning any transactions with one of these markets, you've got some opportunity because at some point the cryptocurrency needs to be converted to/from cash.

Of course, you'd have to dedicate some investigative and enforcement resources to the effort.

If to bet on a prediction market you have to both use a VPN and launder your money like you're a drug dealer, and I don't think many people would do it.

Mostly no. If you're connected it to a banking account, or other KYC platform, maybe, but the folks capable of doing that are part of the same administration supposedly doing the manipulation, so they would not investigate themselves.

Indeed, they are actually fighting against those trying to regulate it [0]

Indeed, the president's son works for Polymarket, and has invested in it [1]

0 –https://www.npr.org/2026/04/02/nx-s1-5771635/trump-cftc-kals...

1 – https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2025/08/polymarke...

> Mostly no. If you're connected it to a banking account, or other KYC platform, maybe,

But if you're (say) and American betting on it, the money almost certainly flows through one of those entities. And if you're using bitcoin the ledger is totally public, so you could track it from Coinbase (KYC) to whatever wallet the prediction market is using to accept payment (or vice versa).

> Indeed, they are actually fighting against those trying to regulate it [0]

Choosing to "do something about it" or not is a different question than can something be done at all. I was addressing the latter.

I don't have access to that. The government which has access to that is the very government making money doing this, so would not investigate itself.

If your question was purely technical, the answer is maybe, depending on the exchange flow. e.g. Maybe it was exchanged through Monero along the way or something, then the answer might be closer to "no".

KYC data is certainly confidential.

> The government which has access to that is the very government making money doing this, so would not investigate itself.

I'm not obsessed with the Trump administration, so let's not make everything about them, OK? There are other governments in the world and there will be other administrations in the US in the future. I would like to talk about prediction markets in general.

If your question was asking about a practical, realistic possibility of this being done, then your weird fixation on the trump administration aside, the answer is "no".

The existence of illegal gambling is far less a problem than the issue of legal gambling from your phone.

You absolutely can market make on Polymarket. The barrier to entry is actually extremely low; you can do it from an AWS instance in Dublin (the closest non-geo-restricted region to the Polymarket exchange), and don't need the kind of infra that is needed to market-make on US stocks. Retail can absolutely do it on anything crypto-based.

In order to market make, you just need to price probabilities better than everyone else. That's it.

On Wall Street on the other hand it has come down to FPGAs and free space microwave links because fiber optics' index of refraction causes a ~31% reduction in the speed of light. If you don't have millions of dollars you can't get into that game. Over-regulation cas resulted in this space being only accessible to the ultra-rich.

Turns out the US federal regulator is not doing their job, and is actively trying to prevent US states from imposing regulations.