The chlorophyll in plants is finely tuned to absorb specific wavelengths of light. It already has a hard time with green light compared to blue light, and it's simply not going to work at all with radiation that has wavelengths that are orders of magnitude shorter. Chlorophyll acts like a little antenna that gets excited by certain light frequencies, but ionizing radiation would just blow the chlorophyll molecules apart and destroy them.

Taking advantage ionizing radiation is going to require a completely different mechanism than plant photosynthesis, just like you can't use glass lenses or parabolic mirrors to focus X rays or gamma rays. Plants probably have no more chance of having such a mechanism than fungi do.

It has a seat belt, yet somehow 40,000 people are allowed to DIE every year in a traffic accident. Did people sue car manufacturers during the 60+ years wherein cars didn't have them? They never faced lawsuits that could drive them to bankruptcy over it. You know they could have to pay a billion or something like that.

How many people has ChatGPT directed to off themselves? We allow cars to kill 40,000, but ChatGPT is liable if one person who had already decided to off himself uses it? This is the same as suing a car manufacturer for allowing someone to drive to a bridge location from which they jump off. And btw, ChatGPT does have some protection but ultimately if you're determined to find out information you'll find a way to make it give it to you. I mean it would have to block answers to questions like "what's the tallest structure in my town?" and other "dual use" questions .. which depending on how broad they make it could be virtually any question.

This is just dumb. There are conflicts over water, but when you include incidents that are part of a larger conflict that is not over water (Israel/Palestinian or Ukraine/Russia), you're just swamping any insight you might have gotten with meaningless noise. This is obvious, so I assume they're not looking for signal but just trying to make a big number for some other reason.

ChatGPT is an online service, if we held it to the standard that no person could utilize it to harm themselves or others it wouldn't be allowed to exist. The same as cars wouldn't exist if we decided that a car manufacturer is liable for every accident regardless of the user disregarding the terms of how they are supposed to use the car.

You don't use ChatGPT therefore you see no value in it. The rest of us do use it and want services like it to exist. You'd never ban cars, even though traffic accidents kill 40,000 people in the USA every year. If you care about protecting human life so much, how come you haven't banned vehicles?

Huh? Are you crazy? It obviously doesn't fly around with a 300 foot cable sticking out. Do you know how a tether works. Furthermore, if it does get tangled it snaps off and notifies.

No doubt, but the grownups aren't talking about replacing the fuel bill with a per mil charge, we're talking about replacing the fuel tax>/em>. California has the highest gas tax in the US, at 61.2 cents per gallon. I drive about 10,000 miles a year. The gas tax comes out to a bit less than $250/year at 25 mpg. 3 cents per mile would be $300/year, or higher (though not a lot higher).

In the rest of the country - by definition, our gas tax being the highest - the difference will be more.

Note that the gas tax in California (like most states) does not go to CalTrans, responsible for maintaining highways, it goes into the general fund, for whatever graft and corruption on the the menu this week. The same would be true of any per mile tax on EVs.

As for replacing the fuel bill, last time I calculated it, the cost of electricity here to charge a typical EV would also cost more than the gasoline, and electricity has gone up since then (quite a bit this year), where gas goes up and down, but has hovered between $4-5/gallon for years.

According to Google, Starliner is a fixed-price contract, so (in theory) they should only get paid for meeting milestones. There's no extra profit to Boeing in dragging this out (again, in theory).

Paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds. Contractors are paid by the government which paid for by the people. It's government, and our, IP.

Zipline's drone tech is a lot better and way quieter. The Zipline drone, which is already pretty quiet, stays over 300 feet above the drop site and reels the/ package down with a tether in an aerodynamic pod. No noisy drone landing and highly accurate package placement even when it's windy. Reference: https://www.zipline.com/techno...

And you've just accused me.

China is committed to controlling the world. All of it. They believe themselves so inherently superior to the lesser races that it is their destiny and obligation to run everyone.

They've been playing similar games in Africa for years. They're just confident enough now to move on to bigger prey.

Regardless of why it's done, such a prohibition is a good and necessary thing. China has already proven that they will use control over exports to make economic war on those it wishes to conquer and enslave (which is everyone).

Or probably would have hallucinated an elaborate conspiracy theory to back up the claim.

It won't play well with the jury, either, whose opinion actually matters.

AI implies intelligence of some sort.