She left with a friend, who headed home after a few days, so she ended up traveling solo for most of the trip. She stayed in hostels (bar in Paris) and ate basically only TooGoodToGo food [0] to save €. She made it home in one piece, with the biggest smile on her face.

[0] https://www.toogoodtogo.com/

sRGB or ACEScg are color spaces.

CMYK or RGB etc. are color models.

This matters a lot. And yeah, it seems this supports neither and it is unclear if operations happen in linear light at a bit depth of at more that 8bit/channel.

If they don't, most of them will produce subtly wrong results.

As the mating pool grows and includes more genetic variation, the propagation penalty for non-obvious genetic defects decreases because feature breakages are mitigated by reinforcement from the pool.

In a small and relatively homogenous mating pool (let’s say a band cluster with some non-zero interband genetic flow velocity), a genetic feature breakage that does not get filtered out by sexual selection or consistent early death will be extremely harmful to the group and could kill it or cause it to be outcompeted by neighbor clusters. However, in a large scale society, a breakage in an individual is likely not also in the mate, so the breakage can persist as a recessive without causing consistent damage.

So, if an extant hunter gatherer group has any substantial mixture with or heritage from any group that was ever living in a large scale society with a large mating pool, we would expect them to face a problem of recessive diseases from this source and an appropriate response would be intermarriage.

Which isn’t to say there aren’t other potential sources of recessive diseases, but I do believe the observations of extant hunter gatherer groups is likely corrupted by this vis a vis true ancestral human behavior.

There are also other reasons why interband mating could be advantageous as a social cooperation strategy within the band network, but I wouldn’t necessarily expect that to be so universal that it would be baked into instinct, and it seems like it isn’t based on how people feel in similar situations today.

Beyond this, even if that was universal (which it could be), that would be like half your children moving in with your cousin’s family in the next neighborhood over, in exchange for a similar number of your cousin’s children coming to you. Not really much like what happens today.

Native readers will notice those errors, but they won't be characteristic of you. They'll be characteristic of everyone who speaks your language. Nonnative readers aren't likely to notice them at all.

I was imagining a setup like medieval Europe (where international communication is done in a language spoken by none of the parties, Latin) or Achaemenid Persia (where internal government communication is likewise done in a language not spoken by the administrators, Aramaic) or imperial China and its surrounding states (ditto, classical Chinese).

All of this communication is severely crimped by the fact that nobody involved is a native speaker. What happens is that certain fixed patterns from the original language get informally standardized and communication strongly prefers them to whatever alternatives a native speaker of the original language might have used. This lowers the mental burden on everyone.

It also produces extremely stilted and formalized prose, from all parties, which inhibits stylometry. If you only know one way to say something, you'll use it. If everyone else also only knows one way to say that same thing, you'll be anonymous.

(It's possible to study a foreign language past this point. But the overwhelming majority of people aren't going to do that.)

Interestingly, LLMs disagree with you.

Your statement is only accurate in an extremely narrow case, like if you were there to hear the person speaking, before their speech which was transcribed. Obviously, it is not true for almost all of human writing.

And if you were to go commaless, you will quickly get to rather precarious sentences, such as this one:

"Let's eat grandma."

A comma is the natural fix:

"Let's eat, grandma."

Over the years I got a hand full of stable clients. Some want content every month, some every quarter, etc.

Then there is word of mouth. The people I work with at my client companies are usually in the content business, so they need constant influx of quality content and know many other people who need it too.

I also work with a tech content agency, they always have a few articles a month I can work on, if business is slow.

- I have a Business Analyst/Product Mgr background. I've never been a developer, but I can read code well enough and get a good idea of what's going on. Do I have a chance of breaking into this? How would I go about doing so (other than the obvious like trying to do it as part of my day job)? - Do you worry LLMs are going to put you out of business? - Very broadly speaking, could I make $150k doing this?

In my experience, the success stands and falls with how well you can grasp technical topics and explain them to people who have less time than you to learn them.

I know a bunch of good writers, who never got far, because their technical understanding wasn't enough to write guides/tutorials/explainers.

"Do you worry LLMs are going to put you out of business?"

Not yet. I use LLM every quarter to write an article, and they've always been bad.

"Very broadly speaking, could I make $150k doing this"

Probably.

An article makes you between $500 and $1000, depending on the length and quality. If you could write 200 a year, that could work.