Comment Re:And if we keep up with that AI bullshit we (Score 1) 33
You gotta log in if you think anybody is gonna read that long of a rant.
You gotta log in if you think anybody is gonna read that long of a rant.
I don't see any reason not to trust the Autobots, lets just put it charge of everything then!
The Cloudflare captchas just loop back to themselves for me on over 90% of sites that use them. But a few work.
I believe they're selling an anti-adblock service to sites, and pretending everybody is blocked for a different reason, through creative categorization.
The internet didn't always have a business model. Started out as an academic wonderland.
The internet was created by the military to allow university researchers to collaborate on weapon research.
The heat and the light are not physically different things. If the light is absorbed, then the object that absorbed it was heated by that amount of energy.
If the heat escaped, that would mean the light was reflected, and it wouldn't be black, it would be white. (Or a mirror, depending on how consistent the angle of reflection is)
Do these people really think?
No. Any other questions?
It has nothing to do with small cars that the dealers will refuse to sell, it is about rolling back the crash safety standards.
Even after all these years of this shit, Americans are still to stupid to see a bait-and-switch staring them in the face. There is little hope for the future.
The real question is "Will they re-release the roadrunner cartoons?".
Do you really think fiction is a reasonable source of facts?
Remember that models used from a decade or more ago always make simplifying assumptions, and that those tend to be unquestioned until data shows that they must be. Even now climate models can't handle all the variables known to be needed. Turbulence is *extremely* difficult to handle. And there probably is some "butterfly effect". The way that's normally handled it to run an ensemble of models with slightly different conditions, but they may all make some of the same simplifying assumptions.
Well, panspermia is possible, but not extremely likely. OTOH, if life started on Mars, it could well have spread to Earth on impact debris. The further away, the less likely. But remember that yeast have survived in space conditions for months, perhaps years...and that wasn't in extreme cold (though it was in inactive form).
OTOH, years is different from centuries. And for interstellar trips in a comet, centuries wouldn't be enough.
Those are descendants of LUCA. A better question would be viruses, because in that case we don't really know. (There aren't any ribosomes. [OTOH, if there are descendants of another origin, they've massively adapted.])
OTOH, we haven't checked all life on earth. So assertions about universals should be viewed with that in mind.
No. The mapping of nucleotide sequences onto amino acids isn't predetermined. We've built in the labs versions that are different.
OTOH, the argument still isn't good. It could be a low, but not extremely low, probability. In that case the first one to show up could have a VERY strong advantage. And we haven't checked all life on Earth, so the assertion that they are all the same hasn't really been proven, either.
We are pretty certain that the appearance of life involved some very low probability events, but that there were a lot of environments around with lots of different samples for a long period of time, so a "low probability event" should be expected to show up (even if not any particular low probability event).
Different groups of people designate street crossings and manage school buses. Ideally you're right, it should be fixed. Now get two different groups of people with different priorities to agree.
If you don't like the rule, manage it with school bus routing, but prepare to need twice as many route miles along lots of segments.
That's the "routing problem" I mentioned.
If I want your opinion, I'll ask you to fill out the necessary form.