Absolutely this: pure greenwashing.

I've looked into several carbon-capture scheme from an engineering POV. Once you account for all the ancillary costs, every single one of them was a net generator of CO2. Just as an example, I remember one that wanted to gather straw from fields, compact it into blocks, and bury it. Their numbers didn't account for the farm machinery needed to gather the straw, the trucks to transport it to the block-making factory, or the fact that farmers would need to add some other biomass to the fields to replace the straw (which otherwise gets plowed under).

Christopher Columbus was a product of his times. As for how he and his successors treated the natives they met, well, have you heard of "conversion by the sword"? The catholic priests coming to the battlefield, shouting to natives a chance to become Christian (in Spanish or Portugeuse, of course), then blessing the slaughter when the natives failed to do so. For that matter, do you have any idea how sailors - on literally all ships of the time - were treated?

It doesn't make a lot of sense to judge historical figures by today's standards.

I used Ada as it was just really coming out, back in the mid-80s. I reported a lot of compiler bugs. A few of them even got fixed.

It's a government language, verbose, designed by committee. You can use the language any way you like, because the committee tossed in literally every paradigm they could. OO? Real-time? Functional? Whatever you want - it may be ugly, but you can do it.

I know a guy whose small company is maintaining around a million lines of Fortran - a few years ago, they had a major effort to at least move it to a more modern dialect. Attempts to re-engineer it into C++ have been mostly futile, because too many little things are different (array handling, for one). Old languages never die - they just accumulate.

I wonder. How is it that your bank hasvthecright to share your private, financial information with anyone? Bank secrecy used to be a thing...

One, the article refers to: having children is expensive. I think the second reason, adult priorities, is less studied. 50 years ago or so, it was socially important to raise a family. Today, it is not - indeed, to some extent, wanting kids is seen as a bit strange. Why is that? If it is something we (as a society) want to change, how would we do that?

Finally, on a non-PC note: the "wrong" people are still having plenty of kids. People who cannot support them, or take care of them. On local TV, they did a very sympathetic documentary about a guy here as an asylum seeker: how he's adapting, working, etc. Only if you paid attention did you realize that he (in his early 20s) already has three kids with three different women. Of course, all of them are being supported by welfare programs. No consequences - why not have sex with lots of different women, have lots of kids? It costs him exactly nothing.

From what I've read, nothing was going to help. Kids in csmos, probably scattered doing activities - and the river rose around 30 feet in less than an hour?

Upstream was a weird storm that remained stationary while dropping 2 feet of rain. Impossible to predict, and once it happened, there was basically no time to warn folks.

Dark matter is a kludge. Something is off in our models, or we're missing something else. So we invent ether invisible, undetectable "dark matter" to explain the discrepancy.

I am sure that some people let AI write stuff that they shouldn't. However, I question that "fingerprints" are in any way meaningful. Many, many people ask AI to edit their writing, to correct mistakes in spelling and grammar, to improve clarity, or whatever. I certainly do this - where I might have earlier asked a person to proofread for me, I now generally ask AI.

If there is such a thing as a uniquely identifiable "fingerprint" (which I doubt), then such editing will also create it.

I met a guy a couple of weeks ago: he's a professional software PM, but doesn't himself know how to program. So he is presumably good with requirements, knows generally how software development works, etc..

We live in a wine region, and he has an extensive wine cellar. He wanted an iOS app to keep track of what he has, what he thought of each bottle, etc.. Using a collection of various AIs (because sometimes one would get stuck), and over the course of 2-3 months, he gradually built an app. He showed it to me, and I can only say "wow". It's a lot more than a CRUD app - it includes features like import/export, like taking a picture of a label, automatically extracting text bits for dropdowns, so that you can manually choose which bit of text is the winery, which bit is the name of the wine, etc.. Very slick, very professional, very feature rich. A talented programmer could achieve the same thing in the same time frame. A mediocre programmer - no chance.

Again, the guy understands the software development process. In some sense, he was treating the AIs like programmers, and directing them the way he directs a human team. But still - to create a professional quality app, fiddling around part-time for a couple of months? Without writing, or even correcting any code yourself? Wow.

It still takes experience? That is exactly the challenge. AI is good enough to replace junior programmers. But then, how do we get senior programmers?

Of course, NASA recently released satellite data showing that total Antarctic ice has increased in recent years. Now, maybe that is ice on land, since sea ice is decreasing - especially around the peninsula, due to volcanic activity. However, the actual ESA press release notes that this doesn't make any sense either, since melting sea ice should reduce the saltiness of the water.

At this point, honestly, it may be measurement errors. If it's not, it may be that the salinity is responsible for the loss of sea ice, rather than any sort of climate change. Further investigation needed.

I know an anecdote is not data, but after my Covid booster, I did have myocarditis. That really should not happen. I did not risk any further mRNA Covid vaccinations.

I hope they solve that problem...

I keep hearing how the BBB slashes Medicaid, but no one ever lists the actual changes. As far as I can find out, here's what is changing:

• If you are able-bodied, you must either work, be in school, or do some community service. Exception for parents with younger children.
• States must check your eligibility every six months
• Green card holders cannot access Medicaid for their first 5 years in country

Because of concerns about rural hospitals:

• Adds a $50 billion fund to support rural hospitals

So...what part of the above is a problem? I'm guessing the very first one? The fact that, to receive welfare benefits, you actually have to do something?

...to avoid movie theaters. Granted, I haven't been to one in years. The last couple of attempts put me off. Aside from the ads and previews, chattering kids, and all the usual annoyances, we have (1) Way too many mobile phone screens. Incredibly distracting, can't your Instagram wait 2 hours? (2) Eardrum-shattering sound levels. I like things loud, but jeezum, I shouldn't leave with my ears bleeding.

Invite your friends over, watch movies at home. Nowadays, nearly everyone has a decent-sized screen and good sound. Dim the lights, sit back and enjoy. Oh, and you can pause if you need to fetch another beer or more snacks.

Of course, getting those movies is easiest on the high seas. Last movie we watched, I tried to buy it. I really did. It's an older movie, available for sale in the US, in Germany, in a couple of other countries. Not living in those countries, literally no site would take my money. They even blocked VPN attempts. After an hour of trying, I gave up. A couple of clicks later, I had it for free. Idiots don't want my money...

It's like the movie industry is trying to commit suicide.

It depends on what they call success. Look at the pace of Falcon 9 launches, and the massive reduction in launch costs that represents. That is a very successful commercialization of space.

Lunar probes? No, not much success there, but it's also an open question what commercial value those could ever have. Let's be honest: we are not going to be mining moon resources anytime soon. And Mars? It's a great dream, but even in the most optimistic scenarios it will never be profitable.

The fundamental problem with space was best explained by Douglas Adams: "Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."