The standard is 40 amps at 240V, so around 10kW. And yes, they ARE charging 300 trucks at the same time.

I have just bought a new set of EV tires (with sound-deadening foam) for my Model 3. They came up to $310 per tire with installation. A slightly cheaper set was $260 per tire.

So you're looking at maaaybe paying $400 extra per the set of tires, and you need a new tire set every 30000-40000 miles. I think that's pretty much negligible.

No, ignoring the XY position of windows is a specific design decision by Wayland. They did it on purpose because they think it is a security problem. The idea that the desktop could just look at the requested positions and only ignore bad ones apparently is foreign to them. Instead they made it impossible for an application to store window positions.
They also purposely designed it so it is impossible to work with overlapping windows, by requiring that clicking in a window always raises it,a design that was removed from X10 to make x11. Their arrogance shows no bounds.

It is critical to know the inner reasoning in order to determine whether something understands. A parrot can speak but I do not think anyone believes that it understands what it is saying.

If you understand the concepts behind the words rather than the pattern the words make then you can use logical reasoning to determine new information. An AI trained on word patterns cannot do this and so, faced with a new situation has no clue how to respond and is far more likely to get things wrong. This is why ChatGPT performs so poorly on even simple, first-year university physics questions when asked to explain observations or results...and this is with situations that are known and have happened before. Being able to take concepts and using them to logically extrapolate what will happen in different situations is a key hallmark of intelligence and that is something that current AI simply cannot do.

Every time I go past the In-n-Out Burger and see 40-50 cars lined up to talk into a scratchy intercom and wait half an hour to get food, I think how much more convenient it would be if all of those people could just park their car wherever they wanted (or even not have to get into their car at all), enter their order into an app on their phone, and have their food lowered down to them by a drone.

There'd be no more congestion issues, no need to spend 30 minutes idling in a slowly-advancing car lineup, and no need to repeat your order three times so a teenager can still get it wrong. You might have to deal with gangs of crows trying to intercept your order mid-delivery, though.

The point _was_ made: "constant rate" means that the rate of expansion remains the same with time. What you are talking about is a _common_ rate of expansion. The summary says that they are considering variations in the rate as a function of position but, by saying that the rate is constant that inplies that it does not vary with time and that is wrong: we know from multiple supernova studies that the expansion is accelerating. This even gave is a new possible "end of the universe" scenario: the "big rip" where in the incredibly distant future if the expansion keeps accelerating then possibly at somepoint the causally connected region of the universe might shrink to the planck scale at which point space-time itself will become impossible although this is all highly hypothetical since we do not understand what is driving the expansion.

Then we would know because while the universe refuses to define a common zero for velocity (velocity is relative), it absolutely does define a common zero acceleration.

It's already known that the expansion seems to be accelerating. Several supernova studies all point to an accelerating expansion likely driven by Dark Energy but, regardless of the cause, we already know the expansion rate is not a constant.

I suspect that for anything that still needs it you can use an FPGA implementation of the Z80.

The conservation laws are statistical, at least to a degree. Local apparent violations can be OK, provided the system as a whole absolutely complies.

There's no question that if the claim was as appears that the conservation laws would be violated system-wide, which is a big no-no.

So we need to look for alternative explanations.

The most obvious one is that the results aren't being honestly presented, that there's so much wishful thinking that the researchers are forcing the facts to fit their theory. (A tendency so well known, that it's even been used as the basis for fictional detectives.)

Never trust results that are issued in a PR statement before a paper. But these days, it's increasingly concerning that you can't trust the journals.

The next possibility is an unconsidered source of propulsion. At the top of the atmosphere, there are a few candidates, but whether they'd impart enough energy is unclear to me.

The third possibility is that the rocket imparted more energy than considered, so the initial velocity was incorrectly given.

The fourth possibility is that Earth's gravity (which is non-uniform) is lower than given in the calculations, so the acceleration calculations are off.

When dealing with tiny quantities that can be swamped by experimental error, then you need to determine if it has been. At least, after you've determined there's a quantity to examine.

Money, of course. It's much easier to string people along by saying "if only we had $30,000,000 to launch the full-scale version!"

It's a contemporary version of a "Dean Drive", with enough of a sketchy and poorly reviewed patent to encourage people who crave a propellant free drive for use in space.

Perhaps not but I've a lot of experience using "AI" (although I prefer the term machine learning) for analysis it can and does do stupid things from time to time. In my case that results in some obviously wrong physics results but my code is not in control of a state-of-the-art, fully armed fighter jet.

Exactly how would this apply given that they were protesting _at_ the employer's premises and disrupting other employees who were trying to work there? It seems very reasonable to me that if you turn up at your place of employment and use your access to that place to disrupt the normal business of your employer by staging a sit-in that you should get fired for doing so.

After all, if these people really believed in what they were protesting then the honourable thing to do would be to resign from Google first, like government ministers do when they have a strong moral or ethical objections to the actions of the government of which they are part. Yes, it's a tough decision to make with financial repercussions but if you are not willing to do that then what you have is a preference not a strong moral objection.

It's 2024 - people still use Windows? Why?

I have nothing worth hiding, but I have an even simpler method:

Don't put incriminating things on your phone.
Don't use biometrics AT ALL. Literally just turn them off.

My bank app tries to remind me every 6 months or so and I just dismiss it. Google also seems to think that I can "pay" with a biometric as an option whenever I buy an app or book on their apps... which is interesting because I've literally never given them one. Selecting the option wants me to enroll a fingerprint using my Google password. Nope.

Paypal tries the same - keeps pretending that I can "login" with my fingerprint as an option despite the fact that I have no stored fingerprint on my phone or Paypal account.

The only place I've ever been required to give a biometric was when applying for a passport. That's it. I consider that a reasonable extra metric to have on such a document to help prevent forgery or misuse of my identity if it gets stolen. Nothing else has or could verify my biometrics whatsoever, certainly nothing consumer/commercial.

(I think that too many companies are just too tricky in trying to obtain your details. Whatspp, for example, demanded I furnish them with a ton of information to "confirm" who I was when I asked them to remove data... and 50% of the information requested has LITERALLY never been given to Whatsapp or any partner company... it was just a data-hoarding exercise. "Give us your home address if you want us to remove your data from our servers"... er... no. You have absolutely nothing to confirm that against, and if you do we have a FAR LARGER problem almost immediately).

Disable biometrics, they are not required. Stop faffing around using them as a convenience method, because that's all they are. They are not, and cannot ever be, secure because you're giving them out to every device that tries to read them.