Agree about the meaning of "hallucinate" in this context, but...

You can't be sure your brain is deterministic. It may well have features that operate at the quantum level, with the implied genuine uncertainty. Transistors are normally scaled to avoid that problem. This isn't exactly "free will" in any normal sense, but it *is* non-deterministic behavior, at least as far as we can tell. (Yeah, superdeterminism is a valid interpretation of quantum theory, and so is the multi-world interpretation and a few others that take the entire universe as context. So in some sense it's still deterministic, but it's a really weird sense. And as far as the Copenhagen interpretation [i.e. "shut up and calculate"] goes even in that sense it's non-deterministic.)

If such a thing is possible then we should call that a correction and it needs to happen sooner than later, the fantasy can't go on forever. I think we all know the stock marker is irrational and has been for years. Boom n' bust baby.

Did some automated trading occur as a result of algorithmic correlation? Yes. Is it responsible for the sell-off? No, the people who programmed them are responsible for that. Is automated trading a waste of energy and a threat to everyone? Yes.

The only way to unfuck the stock market is to put a cooldown penalty on buying and selling. You can buy or sell as fast as you want but if you buy and sell the same stock too soon then you should pay a penalty. Also, make all the fucking dark pools illegal already.

Oh dang, you're right! That's explains everything! ;)

Not at all. If climate change was not occurring the same outcome would have been reached.
With the level of mismanagement they did, the outcome was invariable. Therefore climate change could be removed as being a factor in the outcome and thus 0 percent a result of climate change.

"When it concerns English-speaking people, we call it" idiocy under the sub-category "Tragedy of the Commons".

"rational individuals optimizing their personal well-being" is a euphemism that greedy fools like you use to avoid acknowledging your own greed and foolishness.

No, that is your assumption and on you to prove. My argument is in an acquisition many of those will be laid off in short order for "efficiency" reasons and there is precedent for that particularly in filings where consolidation of resources is presented a reason for merger particularly when the other company is struggling. Also part of my proposal is that not allowing mergers will create more competition so those people can get more jobs. If good companies with bad luck deserve to be aquired then how can you argue good employees in bad companies wont get hired again? This is contradictory.

This example contradicts itself.

This also does. Unable to make debt is a prime example of how companies die. You took on debt because you were not making money. Profitable companies can get lifelines because they make profit and can tend to show they can continue growth.

*European* regulators to be clear. Sounds like you agree with me. See my thing is I think your latter example, the Figma example is in the 80/20 rule. The vast majority of MA is for this reason the vast minority is for your former reason, the altruistic "they're really good but just couldn't sell their idea". I am very willing to sacrifice the much smaller and much less consequention minority to stop the far more harmful majority.

Well then as part of my plan I would make it easier for companies to go IPO, bingo. What's next?

You got it wrong. What they did is pump the aquifers dry and that caused the land to collapse. As a result, the natural storage of water in the land can no longer happen. They destroyed naturally occurring water infrastructure by pumping out all the water they could. This was an easily avoidable issue and they were warned this was happening and yet they did nothing.

Climate change did zero percent of the damage. Instead, what has occurred is 100% the result of idiocy. So yes, it has something in common with climate change but it's not the same thing at all.

Just because the coroner finds that the victim was days away from having a fatal brain aneurysm doesn't make you less guilty of murdering them.

Wrong. Neither Linux nor UNIX are mentioned in the specification. However, it should be noted that the specification is hosted on Freedesktop.org which clearly states on their site that...

Freedesktop.org is a project to work on interoperability and shared base technology for free-software desktop environments for the X Window System (X11) and Wayland on Linux and other Unix-like operating systems.

They do mention Linux and Unix-like operating systems being target operating system. However, there is no mention of UNIX systems specifically. Additionally, nobody claimed it was exclusively Linux, only that it would impact Linux users.

Honestly, if I were you, I would be dreadfully embarrassed for making such a boisterous pronouncement only to be shown to be a obnoxious fool.

What should be of interest to slashdotters isn't the irony of someone associated with cryptography losing their private key, but that there exists an open source system to securely allow voting and also to absolutely verify that the vote was counted. All while still maintaining anonymity. Barring the issue of losing private keys on the part of those administering the vote, this sort of system is very interesting, and really could be used to promote voter engagement and democracy. I had heard of it before, but kind of forgot about it.

I don't think treason could have been made to apply. It's defined in the Constitution, and the definition is a *LOT* stricter than colloquial use.

Ah, but who is the consumer of those resources. Perhaps Google is selling compute to other companies. That could be quite a profitable approach.

Same with wolves where the whole idea of the "alpha" was a misunderstanding from one guy who even went back and corrected the observation since he initially made it watching captive animals, in the wild they're just families, the "leadership" observed was parents to children not the big dog in charge.