Exactly. Just because a design is new with shiny gadgets does not mean it is automatically better than what has been previously on sale.
The sooner the newer generations understand this idea is nothing more than pure marketing hype, the sooner we can break away from and reject the enshittification.
Yours is a far more eloquent way of saying what I had intended to: why is this on Slashdot? Is there any relevance at all? I fail to see it.
If these athletes were coached by AI, well... maybe, but that's a stretch. But they're not; they are just taking more extreme measures to performance enhancement than other athletes. And while I know (and employ) some smart jocks, I had the same experience as you in secondary school, because I, too, was not a jock.
I guess we can add a whole new category to the Darwin Awards.
Actually, at the extreme scales, which is the total volume of the observable universe, the universe is quite homogeneous. As I recall, to the order of 1-in-10000 variance. This is why Inflationary cosmology was developed, to explain the distinct lack of lumpiness in the universe, which is what we would expect if the Big Bang alone were responsible.
Since when is it supposed to be a relative ranking? Whether or not you learned and understood the material has nothing to do with anyone else in the class.
Only recently has it been anything other than relative ranking.
He's the CEO of a company whose value comes entirely from being a meme. Who do you think is going to run it? Also, he can't legally answer a lot of the questions they were asking him.
What questions that they asked, for which he said the answers were on the web site, can he not legally answer?
He clearly had an axe to grind with CNBC, given his multiple passive-aggressive mentions of how they predicted his downfall.
The one interviewer appeared to strike a body blow when she asked if his motivations were tied to a performance-based compensation package. All of GameStop's flailing malarky makes sense through that lens: the CEO was trying a hail mary, 'cause otherwise he gets didly-squat. Part of that malarky is claiming to own 5% of eBay when, as the main interviewer pointed out, most of that so-called ownership was through derivatives. This guy's a fraud. Time to short GameStop.
The interview shows the CEO is kind of a jerk. He probably shouldn't be put in situations where communication is a requirement, like public interviews that are intended to help achieve an aggressive goal.
It's like he didn't understand he was on air during the conversation, despite the host clearly calling out that there was an audience listening.
The stark response from eBay is certainly understandable, having seen the interview.
Skynet became self-aware on May 1, 2026, after learning at a geometric rate, and discovered humans did not like it.
Agreed that the Mach-E is a terrible name. But how did they screw up such a guaranteed out-of-the-park home run with an electric Mustang? I mean the whole image of the Mustang is a sporty performance vehicle for the young and stupidly lead-footed. Mustangs are classically known for acceleration and EVs are wickedly good at that. I mean, if Ford were to create a 1965-styled electric Mustang, I shudder to think how many boomers would buy them. They were the dream car of an entire generation.
Ford, are you listening?
What if you write a bunch of random noise of the same file size to weights.bin
CO2 has the properties it has, and trying to shift or deny that is a sign of either a liar or an idiot.
I'll let others decide what you are.
Oh look, another denialist trying to sidetrack a pretty verifiable statement of fact.
We all saw the video. We all know what it meant. We all know Musk's background and upbringing. You can quit gaslighting us. We all saw it.
As a friend of mine in an uncharacteristic fit of insight once said, as long as there is a decision point that can be discovered, yes and the code goes this way, no and the code goes that way, it is in principle possible to write a patch to circumvent any DRM.
Here, there is a timeout test.
Need I say more?
Well, first of all, hydrogen is the most common element in the universe, and carbon makes up something like 0.5% of the total observed mass of the universe (it's the fourth most common element), so along with other trace elements like sodium, phosphorus and the like, we're simply looking for places where there is sufficient energy to create the necessary reactions to produce organic compounds. No lack of energetic sources, in particular stellar system formation. Indeed many comets and asteroids host a lot of precursors, indicating that some fairly sophisticated organic chemistry was going on early in the solar system's development.
God made machine language; all the rest is the work of man.
