On the first day? Barely, though in "good" daycares, you usually have a connection because placement is competitive and you got in through nepotism.
After a couple months? If you don't know the other kids by name and some other parents, you may have a bad daycare full of people who do not care.
My sister ran a fairly renowned daycare for over a decade. She ended up the caretaker for the children of many friends, and gained many friends of the children she helped raise. The daycare was a massive part of their community. It allowed the parents to function in modern society while ensuring their child was in the care of, essentially, an expert.
How well does the average person know their neighbors when they move to a new place? Maybe if you had a routine where you and your children meet other families that live close to you... hmmmm
I'm not a parent but my niece and nephew (different parents) both go to daycare. My sister knew many of the parents at her son's daycare already, they live in the same neighbourhood. My nephew knew the children of those parents too. He had his little daycare friends before he started daycare at 18mo. My sister has lived in the same city all her life, some of the parents involved she's known for 30 years.
I'm not as close to my sister in law as I am my sister, but I know that when my niece started daycare they knew some kids and parents from the playground already.
It doesn't strike me as bizarre that someone would know people in their community who are in a similar life stage.
Moving the HBM PHY and DDR PHYs to the HBM base dies is crazy and then in the very next slide they propose logic too. The parallelism you can gain by hooking this up to SIMD running on the HBM logic elements blows my mind.
We need election reform but I'm against term or age limits.
Encourage younger voters and politicians. Remove the current age limits as we're obviously not using them. Make state positions something a young person can live on, right now they have to keep their job and hope the boss is ok with them campaigning for months to just do a short legislative session.
Change campaign laws, Citizens United has shoved so much money into the system, we campaign for months, reducing the effectiveness of elected incumbents and winnowing out the candidates who can't fund raise the entire time.
Uncap the House, they passed legislation in the 1920's to limit their number to 435. Meanwhile they are now granted staff based on the population of their state. We now have more legislative staff than we would have Representatives if we kept to the original 30,000:1 that George Washington did the first presidential veto to keep.
I think age is a bad marker to go off of as well. Different people age in different ways. My point about term limits is limiting total power a person can wield in their lifetime. As a thought experiment, consider if people could live to 300. Do you think any of the entrenched politicians would give up power after 100 years? 200? Would McConnell or Pelosi give up their positions? I can guarantee you that we would still have politicians leaving only because they died after well over 200 years in office. Democracy demands a diversity of voices. Term limits are a cheap way of getting new ones in regularly. Limits can be reasonable to ensure there is experience, but they need to be there or else we will devolve into entrenched power as the only power.
What we really need is better voters. Term limits are a hack trying to work around the voters wanting to elect the same person over and over again. No, I have no idea how you fix that.
A 'hack' that works has a different name, it is called a solution. You will never get 'better voters'. Wishing and wanting for something isn't a plan. How do we get better voters? What is the system that encourages democracy to work?
Allowing power to entrench will lead to entrenched power. Show me a system that doesn't involve hoping people suddenly become 'better voters' without term limits and I will jump on board. My plan is to push for actions that encourage diversity in our democratic processes like limiting money, term limits, removing gerrymandering, etc. These are actionable things that encourage the true core of a democracy, diversity of voice.
I actually have an idea for getting better voters. Remove the age limits -- on both ends. If you can pull the lever or otherwise unambiguously indicate your choice, you can vote.
Obviously this opens up the vote to people who are uneducated and incapable of thinking beyond the shortest term. In other words, not all that much different from existing voters.
The voter won't be better, per se, but they will be different. They will have their own interests, which currently have no voice.
We don't impose intelligence tests on voters. We go on the assumption that somehow, the wisdom of crowds will make up for individual failings. But we're excluding millions of people from that, and they might well make the difference.
But does it work or does it just entrench the power somewhere else? I'm not really opposed to term limits but I'm not convinced they work too well. And they're just distasteful. They're saying, "we know better than the voters." It's a pretty minor version of that statement, but it is nonetheless.
I think the 3 ideas I mentioned above are helpful nudges to reduce incumbency. There are other ways, like Australia's mandatory voting, or the DSA's Abolish the Senate proposal that we're less ready for.
My final argument about term limits actually is news today. Politicians will throw out democracy to stay in power by disenfranchising people. You want to stay in power? Just make sure the other side can't vote. Use your authority to block them getting ballots. Put a poll tax on them. Arrest them then take their vote because you arrested them. Or, just don't deliver their mail because your side decided they aren't properly registered. We need checks on these people that force them out. I will take occasionally having a good one not serve quite long enough for the other 99% to be tossed out before they can take the whole system down. Historically only death pushes the worst ones out. That will always be true unless we put term limits in place to force them out another way.
Humans do it for free. I've got two Amazon Fire tables from a fire sale for $15 each and used a package, that exploits the SOC, from the XDA forums to install full Android on them. Every smartphone I've had before this free Oneplus Nord N30 was rooted and then and had a custom android installed, many of the root processes relied on doing exploits all the way back to my CyanogenMod days.
and then it copies a solution from somewhere (with your expert guidance that you're discounting for some reason) and you write a blog post about how smart it is and the fake price you paid since Claude Max is still selling $200 for $1
this won't be the same story when SoftBank and Oracle go under, the compute is no longer subsidized, and the same experiment costs _literally_ $26000 based on analyst estimates of the real opex
security groups at big orgs can swing that kind of price but most of us won't and that customer base won't be enough to sustain the labs, all that's ever going to be left is niche uses of open weight models IF anyone can afford to continue to train them so they don't become immediately out of date
sorry for the throwaways but the math is off by an order of magnitude because I fucked it up in my head while commenting, by exactly that much lol 2000~ not 20000~ whoops
reply