Adjusted for inflation, that $0.25 is now equivalent to $68 million dollars, so…

Or short people. Only the average thrive.

Rice flour.

Cue the Scroll Phone^TM.

I can’t even imagine the nightmare UI that would accommodate that type of screen.

Mechanically, I could see a device that has a slide down keyboard and a roll up screen. Functionally, I can’t see how it would be useful for daily smart phone actions like one-handed use or swipe-gestures.

I went through a McDonald’s drive-thru the other day and had the most insane experience. For the context of this anecdote, I don’t do that often, so, what I experienced was just weird.

While not quite “AI,” the first thing that happened was an automated voice yells at me, “are you ordering using your mobile app today?”

There’s like three menu-speaker boxes, and due to where the car in front of me stopped, I’m like in between the last two. The other speaker begins to yell, “Are you ordering using your mobile app today?”

The person running drive-thru mumbles something about pull around. I do. Pass by the other menu “Are you ordering using your mobile app today?”

Dude walks out with a headset and starts taking orders from each car using a tablet.

I have no idea what is happening. I can’t even see a menu when the guy gets around to me. Turns the tablet around at me.

I realized that I was indeed ordering using the mobile app today.

Frank Lloyd Wright (1701-1959). Frank Lloyd Wright was an omniscient demimortal techno mage who took up architecture in the late 19th-century at the age of 186 after discovering the eldritch art of soul drafting. He began designing and building structures across the United States with the intention of harnessing the psycho-emotional energy of the US population. Many of his architectural plans plainly display the geometrical interplanar-harvester elements, in comparison to architects such as Ivo Shandor (cult of Gozer) who felt the need to obfuscate the intent of their structures. ^[1]^ Wright’s final design was commissioned from archmage Norman Lykes, who trapped Wright’s life force in a soul stone embedded in a Mission-style rocking chair. Wright’s legacy was commemorated by logistical clerics in a postage stamp in 1966 and in 1970 by Bardic duo Simon & Garfunkel.

My experience with this just taught me that eventually most teachers will just default to authority. They will tell you to stop questioning or stop being difficult in order to prevent the class from getting off-track. Instead they miss a teachable moment both about academic integrity and being a decent person.

I think the difference is that one case is a collective noun and the other is a fallacy.

Contrast with using females as a collective noun which can been seen as reductive or offensive on its own without the fallacious logic.

I’m bothered when ever I hear someone use females as a collective noun for women. Not necessarily because it offends me or because I’m offended on behalf of someone else, but because it sounds so strange to me and the context where it is used is often wildly inappropriate.

The usage is odd; in my experience people who refer to women collectively as females often do not refer to men collectively as males which is often telling about other beliefs and ideas. Also, male/female and man/woman are dichotomies, and using men/females sounds really off.

Referring to people using technical terminology feels reductive and weird to me. Replace female with any other technical identity term and use it the same way: it will get really awkward really fast.

I am aware that the majority of people who use females collectively are not doing so to offend. Hell, the other day, I heard a teacher refer to the girls in her class as females. I doubt she was using it as a pejorative, but she referred to the boys as… boys. The whole thing was weird to me.