And where's the Golden Fleece?

Should we assume the name implies a bond between the mortal and the immortal . Or is it meant to imply it's the son of Zeus , king of the gods? Unlike the Christian gods. The Greek gods were not overly concern with humanity other than it being their plaything. "I'm gonna dress up as a goose and get me a woman tonight!" Was always good for a laugh on mount Olympus.

Why does this forever gimmick cause that end result?

God I want to puke every time I hear smirk d utter the content free buzz term "digital twin". The uttered is putting on airs trying to cos others with their up to date hipness. It's just a model

Where's your loyalty the company? You weren't using that part of your brain anyhow.

But if they paid you for it. Well that would be like gig work . Rent a brain. A mesh network of elastic brain servers.

Of course all the code they'd write would strangely resemble liesure suit Larry

It solves all the problems you name because it is explicitly not a hub motor.

It's a rethink of the CV joint. It's a new type of joint that decouples axial rotation from wheel movement just like a cv joint. However it has the virtue that it can have arbitrarily short linkages. A cv joint can't .

That's the innovation here. The motor is still fixmounted to the chassis. It has a flexible linkage so the wheel can freely move without moving the motor . But the distance bewtween the motor and the wheel can be short.

Julia has all these desired features save one. It's radically different in syntax and thought than python.

It should be surprising to anyone that a machine capable of "understanding" a query, formulating a topical reply, writing that in coherent English and forming many sentences and paragraphs that spool in a logical reasoned order could be contained in a trillion floats.
These things write responses better than most graduate students.
Now never mind accuracy or correctness. I'm just talking about it executing the thing that all past AI researchers and language modelers agreed was a unique and special human talent, and very closely coupled to consciousness and self reflection .

News flash!!! The it's really trivial !
  That is to say, humans are really trivial thought processors. The most special thing we can do can be encoded on a SIM card.

It's not that AI ate complex it's that we're not complex.

And of course if you think about it this is not surprising. Brains evolved by trial and error so the process of making anything sophisticated just isn't baked into the evolutionary process .

Moreover as GANs demonstrate plainly , generative models don't ever improve on their own. They require a competitive discriminator.

Once our brains reached sufficient complexity to assure reproductive success in our current level of socicual competition for mates and not being eaten by tigers the discriminator stopped assisting our brain development.

Surprisingly we have very nearly reach or passed the singularity we all assumed was way way far off.

Strapping a chunky VR headset to your face was literally donning a box

Evidently that's not the case here. A plot in an article he published tools like a plot in his thesis but is for a different compound suggesting he faked the plot. Not plagerism per se

Next up, continuous unstoppable orgasms. Don't forget to set the timer

How is that plagarism??? Most phd theses are just bolted together papers or manuscripts with some glue language. The whole point is to publish them. So how can a person possibly plagiarize their own phd thesis?

Or did he plagiarize someone else's phd thesis?

Diode lasers, typically infrared are efficient and doubling their wavelength is also easy and efficient. Will it be efficient enough? I can't say. But it's a very sweet spot for light generation at single frequencies

But he is fried

Unified memory on the same die as cpu and gpu is a whole lot better than a ram stick in the far side of a bus controller

The Hugo is no longer a representative of the best of sci fi and fantasy. They are now excluding many others because their personal political views are different, completely ignoring the quality of the work. They are giving awards to authors for espousing the "right" politics for works that are far below the standards the award should represent. For example, Scalzi's "Red Shirts" got best novel. It's not a bad story, but it's not a great story, and Best Novel must be a great story.

When the conservative authors asked people to consider books on a list, representing conservative authors, they were accused of attempting to manipulate the vote. Not they didn't. They asked people to read the books and stories on the list and consider them. Manipulating the vote was when some higher ups in the organization publicly stated that straight white men should not be given awards, they should all go to women of color. At the height of this fiasco, they skipped giving out some awards entirely because the obvious winners didn't fit their political views.

Perhaps they've come to their senses since then, but I wouldn't know as I no longer pay attention to the award and a book with the "Hugo Winner" label on it is not the selling point it once was.