The fact that you think philosophy is about "wondering if the universe is real or imagined" just shows me that you don;t really know what philosophy is.

So the guy attempting to lecture me on philosophy doesn't seem to have heard of sophilism (which is typically something most people pick up as general knowledge) and doesn't understand that the bit he's put in quotes is a definition!
Obviously it's a thing of itself and not all philosophy - I was having a go at the above posters very limited approach of thinking an output defines a process and not philosophy in general.

We do understand a *bit* about consciousness.

That is my point. We don't have much of a understanding to base a definition upon. IMHO it's a science issue (process) and not a philosophy one (output). An approach using philosophy alone can't immediately be distinguised from a stopped clock that is correct twice a day since it's dealing with correctness of output.

Actually cooling is a big problem since you can't pump ice. Nuclear at scale is relatively easy with vast amounts of liquid water and a lot harder without.
In a place like the south pole you can expect modes of failure that leave you with no liquid water so you'd have to design the device to cope with that in some way or not involve liquid water at all.

The towers don't have to be that tall. There's not much blocking LoS

I hearby withdraw my earlier comments that flat-earther idiots never existed.

Late last year the room temperature MASER was developed - the thing that all those wireless power freaks that don't understand about losses have been pretending existed for years. It may be a game changer, but some of the problems you mention above are still going to hold.

The time to be polite about bitcoin stopped when the perpetrators started actively targeting people on this site for their scam a couple of years ago. Other reasons can now be found even in mainstream newspapers. So do I really need to put up a polite 5000 word essay in every bitcoin thread to gently point out what should be incredibly fucking obvious by now - and if I did would anyone pay attention?
I think not, it's time to be blunt and use crowbars to get between these scum and their potential victims.

Still going yet still pretending disinterest?

Ummmm... just a thought: Google?

... we don't glorify hackers, we glorify good people doing good things that benefit the common good. It just so happens that some of those people accomplish that goal by hacking.

Any kind of really really basic accounting and inventory control

There is the problem. They couldn't handle the scale enough to be able to do that.

How does that work? What database dump requires an executable? All the ones I know simply create a very large human readable text file.

Who the fuck would execute an executable from a bunch of hackers who claim to have hacked a financial site related to a whole digital currency with said currency residing on the same machine as the one you are running the exe on.

And I thought people that ran kitten.scr.exe were idiots.

First off, I get what you are saying and it seems pretty obvious to me.

But now for the hard and funny until you think about it, then you have to laugh so you don't cry.

Here it is:

And is your post part of such a program?

Where does the dis-information begin/end?

No I don't think you are, the shill accounts are rather obvious to stop, no real posting history, no jokes, no human observations, just shill posts. But when the lying has spread so far, how does a normal person know what is true and what isn't anymore.

And if you ask, why would they do that? So ordinary people give up because they just can't deal with it anymore. The feeling I am having for the last year.

Yes but their response was dishonest, thus worthless - hence my point above.

Come on now. We do not know the scope of his work so please do not pretend otherwise, especially by misdirecting with irrelevant links.

The NSA is already on record as

The NSA is on record for lying to Congress.
They are the boy that cried wolf. They can not be trusted to be honest with this issue if being dishonest is to their disadvantage. If an inquiry into the NSA shows he never brought these issues up then that's a different story.