Don't forget all that poncing around space so they can talk down to aliens with their self-righteous moralizing!

Matt and Trey are going to have a field day over all this.

Here's the thing, there's no less money because of AI, if AIs are willing to work for "free" then instead of putting people out of jobs everyone could still be paid the same amount as before for, and just work less hours.

The reason wages are stagnant is because instead of sharing the profits of technology with everyone all that money has gone straight to the top instead.

Alpha channel is big advantage (worth it in its own IMHO), but even a small size decrease adds up to a lot of bandwidth for high traffic sites, especially any with a lot of image content.

But it does negate the suggestion that we shouldn't replace JPEGs with something smaller just because JPEGs are already "small"...

The BBC news site gets 40 million unique users per week and their homepage contains around 400k worth of JPEGs.

If BPG reduces the size of those images by 100k and If each of those users loads the homepage just once, that would save them 570 gigs of bandwidth per week.

Not to mention the saving for users with bandwidth caps on their connection...

Lossless compression works terribly on photographic images, which limits the kind of images you can practically use with an alpha channel in web browsers today.

A DSLR has managed to detect a large planet in a fast orbit around a small, close star. Kepler is sensitive enough to detect earth-sized planets orbiting G-type stars at 1AU, A DSLR (or even conventional telescope) can't replicate that.

I suspect most (all?) of the transiting planets that today's DSLRs could detect have probably already been detected by sky surveys anyway.

But also of observation (that bacteria were killed by mold) and methodical experimentation (isolating the mold, extracting the antibiotic chemical and performing control trials on animals). Use of Penicillin wouldn't have happened without those further steps.

But your example is about fitting various pieces of evidence together to come up with a theory that challenges previously held beliefs, our AC friend at the top there seems to have missed that bit out. It doesn't matter how true something is, if there's no evidence for it then it's not scientific.

Most archaeologists seem to have come to the conclusion that the Baghdad battery probably wasn't a battery after all...

"shite"? That's far too British!

But if you're going to talk about worthwhile spending then maybe not spending ~$700 million per day ($100 billion every 140 days) in Iraq on a war that increased global terrorism is a better place to start?

But from what I've read it works with the same photosensitive chemicals that are used for etching silicon, so could both be used instead of a mask (I'm assuming they still have to use masks to etch the silicon?) and maybe add polymer parts to the silicon components.

What about shielding? The missions that used SNAP-19 power sources kept them on 3m booms to prevent their radiation from interfering with the scientific equipment.