Tootfinder

Why would anyone use this? $1,500 rent means a $32.49 fee on top of your rent just to have them debit you twice instead of setting up autopay with your bank for free.
Split Pay charges $9.99 1.5% of your total payment amount per month. This fee is added to your first Split Pay payment each month. https://rent.app/help/renters?a=Is-there-a-fee-for-using-Split-Pay---id--FohAfEIBSB2nLJJiwifd0Q

Pressure beneath a periodic travelling water-wave in constant-vorticity flow over a flat bed
Adrian Constantin, Nicolas Gindrier, Otmar Scherzer
https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.21077 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.21077 https://arxiv.org/html/2602.21077
arXiv:2602.21077v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: We investigate within the framework of linear theory the behaviour of the total (hydrodynamic) pressure and of the dynamic pressure in a regular wave train which propagates at the surface of water with a flat bed in a flow with constant vorticity. We show that nonzero vorticity, the hallmark of a non-uniform underlying current, may strongly alter the behaviour with respect to the case of irrotational flows, for which the maximum and minimum of the dynamic pressure always occur at the wave crest and at the wave trough, respectively (the extrema of the dynamic pressure may occur along the flat bed or along the critical level, depending on the vorticity strength). While vorticity does not modify the increase of the hydrodynamic pressure with depth, it can significantly alter the location of the extrema of the hydrodynamic pressure at a fixed depth level.
toXiv_bot_toot

Ownwell, which uses AI to let homeowners appeal property taxes, raised a $30M Series B, bringing its total funding to $54M; it also raised $20M in debt (Mary Ann Azevedo/Crunchbase News)
https://news.crunchbase.com/venture/ownwell-raise-lower-homeowner-propert…

Exclusive: Ownwell Lands $30M To Help Homeowners Lower Their Property Tax Bills
Ownwell, an AI-powered startup that appeals property taxes on behalf of homeowners, has secured $50 million in financing, including $30 million in equity and $20 million in debt, the company tells Crunchbase News exclusively.

High-Dimensional Robust Mean Estimation with Untrusted Batches
Maryam Aliakbarpour, Vladimir Braverman, Yuhan Liu, Junze Yin
https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20698 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.20698 https://arxiv.org/html/2602.20698
arXiv:2602.20698v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: We study high-dimensional mean estimation in a collaborative setting where data is contributed by $N$ users in batches of size $n$. In this environment, a learner seeks to recover the mean $\mu$ of a true distribution $P$ from a collection of sources that are both statistically heterogeneous and potentially malicious. We formalize this challenge through a double corruption landscape: an $\varepsilon$-fraction of users are entirely adversarial, while the remaining ``good'' users provide data from distributions that are related to $P$, but deviate by a proximity parameter $\alpha$.
Unlike existing work on the untrusted batch model, which typically measures this deviation via total variation distance in discrete settings, we address the continuous, high-dimensional regime under two natural variants for deviation: (1) good batches are drawn from distributions with a mean-shift of $\sqrt{\alpha}$, or (2) an $\alpha$-fraction of samples within each good batch are adversarially corrupted. In particular, the second model presents significant new challenges: in high dimensions, unlike discrete settings, even a small fraction of sample-level corruption can shift empirical means and covariances arbitrarily.
We provide two Sum-of-Squares (SoS) based algorithms to navigate this tiered corruption. Our algorithms achieve the minimax-optimal error rate $O(\sqrt{\varepsilon/n} \sqrt{d/nN} \sqrt{\alpha})$, demonstrating that while heterogeneity $\alpha$ represents an inherent statistical difficulty, the influence of adversarial users is suppressed by a factor of $1/\sqrt{n}$ due to the internal averaging afforded by the batch structure.
toXiv_bot_toot

Part of the reason I find generative "AI" peddlers so tiresome, I suspect, is that they regurgitate so much of the playbook of the worst Hegelian/Marxist cliché.
"Follow me, for I represent the FUTURE! How do I know the future, or why do I think the future is better than the present, you ask? Shut up, traitor!"
Do we really have to have this debate all over again?
Anyway, I've added a couple quotations from

Karl Popper: Difference between revisions - Wikiquote

""His “secretary of war” is a cable TV nonentity high on the smell of death, which he confuses for testosterone. "
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/mar/13/donald-trump-iran-war-total-disaster

Regardless of what you think of today's results, I think we can all thank the #hockey gods that neither of the close games ended in penalties. Just about any other way of deciding a winner - number of total letters in the names of everyone on the squad, a debate on Heidegger's hermeneutics, a figure-skate-off, whatever - would be better.

Expect total #enshittification of #Snapchat to start in 3 .. 2 .. 1 ...
--------------------------
Snap Inc blames AI as it lays off 1,000 workers

"To confront the Iranian regime was to walk, with a lit match, towards a tinderbox soaked in gasoline. If it were to be done at all, whether by military or other means, it had to be done with the greatest care. But Trump has blundered in, crushing and trampling all before him, making a bad situation worse. He does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. He does not deserve his war to be assessed charitably. He deserves our contempt."