I love my e-ink reader. I can read anything anywhere, and when my last book is finished, the next read is just a tap away. But that's just for linear reading. When I'm studying, I might be flipping back and forth through a syllabus, or have several of them open side by side. That works poorly on a tablet. On the plus side, with a tablet or latop, students no longer have to carry an unhealthy amount of heavy books to school.

As for using a laptop for taking notes, I find that to be way more distracting than taking notes on paper, whether it's me taking the notes or someone next to me.

This makes no sense. OnlyOffice appears to be Latvian which is part of the EU. Something here smells.

Because it's like the phrase, "Devil hates a coward." It's an admission and excuse for being an ass.

They will just get worse service. Anything else would be un-American.

Only with a server in between. This is not P2P. Hence only outgoing sockets and only in very few places.

Apparently these noobs have never heard of it.

Yes too stupid to *checks notes* get out of a car in the middle of a highway.

If one day you said something intelligent while insulting someone we can all conclude you've finally been replaced by an AI.

Or US-grown bananas, as suggested by Lutnick June last year, given how banana producers were ripping-off America by not producing their bananas locally, thus the heavy tariffs against them. Once America is growing its own tropical fruits, it will stop being a Banana Republic in name only.

So, please explain to me why, in detail, why Trump wants Greenland. Go deep into it: you know, what's happening at the Arctic that's prompting geopolitical maneuvers and the threat of Russia and China and whatnot in the region. Add an explanation for why that thing is happening. Is it a mystery? Does it have causes? Why is it happening now and not, let's say, 200 years ago? Are those causes, maybe, supernatural? No? Then come back and compare that explanation with what you just said. We'll wait.

Really?

If we're looking for an actual downside here, fire all the radiologists and put CEOs in their place to be personally liable for ALL diagnostic readings until AI gets it perfect enough to be defended 100% in every court case.

Perhaps then we'll see how much of a loophole "AI" is with regards to dismissing a Recession.

I'm curious... do you find this idea to be significantly more gruesome than harvesting organs from a dead body and using them in a different living person? Or how about using organs from other animals as transplants in humans?

Personally, those seem more gruesome to me than if I had a spare kidney grown for myself from my own DNA. You even noted that growing single organs would be more acceptable - so how about if they grew a kidney, liver, pancreas, gallbladder, and stomach at the same time? The slope is getting very slippery now - add a few more organs and we're nearly to this replacement body concept!

FWIW, I'd oppose this project, but it's more because I don't trust them. I don't trust that they know what sentience is or how to gauge it, nor whether or not their creations small brains still have it. There's a whole lot more that can be done in the meantime, and I hope that will help prepare us for these dilemmas.

Devil's advocate... helping people conceive often involves fertilizing multiple eggs and throwing away viable embryos. At a minimum, you've slid into a grey area for your position. As you noted above, "You don't get to create and then destroy life just to prolong yours. It is a monstrous suggestion." Are viable embryos "life"?

Now, what if the embryos were genetically altered such that they won't produce much of a brain - something unlikely to be a sentient being? At what point is it no longer OK to discard that organ bag?

I assume you'll become shocked -- shocked, I say! -- when, in a few years, the infrastructure put in place to regulate and restrict dangerous content to people under 16 years of age is repurposed, by an amendment to the law that originally that infrastructure to be implemented, to regulate and restrict content to people under 120 years of age.

If you believe that's unlikely, I suggest learning of what has happened and continues happening in all the States that years ago approved laws to "protect" children from "gender ideology", as those laws have been continuously updated to increase the age of "protection", with some having removed age limits altogether. Something those legislators vowed they'd never do because children!!!11!!!!!!

Frankly, I think your take on this IS the concern. It would be a near immediate upheaval of society, with those that can obtain it amassing great power over time, and population controls being needed once fewer people are dying.

As a side note, Cory Doctorow's Down And Out In Magic Kingdom and Walkaway both touch on some of these pseudo-immortal people in a very interesting way. Both books are terrific and even hold up to multiple readings.