Something isn't "transformative" when it can literally spit out the original work, word for word. Which it absolutely can with LLMs, because that's how they work. All they are, at heart, is a non-linear mathematical regression to a dataset, in this case the corpus of human writing. You can actually look at them as a lossy compression algorithm (technically *all* mathematical models are compression algorithms, after all, since the entire goal is to construct a model that can reproduce the input data set using relatively few parameters. They're just rarely looked at that way). The trained model literally contains a compressed (albeit to some extent lossy) version of the training data set. In some cases, it's not even all that lossy, as ChatGPT has spat out word-for-word reproductions of NYT articles, and image generators will sometimes reproduce watermarks from the source images.

Nah, that's all bullshit. You know how I know? Aside from personal experience, biology, and physics? Statistics. Obesity in the US has **tripled** in the past 60 years. It used to be roughly 1 in 10, now it's more than 1 in 3. That's not genetics: genetics doesn't change like that. That's behavior. It's food becoming so cheap even some of the poorest people can be gluttons. It's sugar being added to bread. It's food crafted not to satiate, but to be consumed. It's ads for Froot Loops targeted at kids. Now, is it easily to lose weight in that environment? Hell no. It's hard as hell. The entirety of the modern capitalist food production system is targeted at making you as fat as possible. But is it possible? Also yes. I mean, you yourself recognize that it's your behavior that keeps you just chubby. Just extrapolate that, and you'll see that you too could actually be skinny, if you wanted it badly enough. To be clear, I don't really blame people who have trouble losing weight. Like I said, lots of stuff is against you. But don't pretend that at the end of the day, it's not something you could change, if you wanted it badly enough. Genetics and environment and education can all make it harder, but they don't make it impossible.

Congratulations! You just used "false dichotomy"! It's... not very effective. The situation isn't "follow the Italian law or copyright will be completely invalidated". The Italian law allows certain rightsholders (certain very rich ones, primarily the football industry) to apply immediate blanket IP bans with no judicial oversight or appeals process. It doesn't exist to protect the GPL. I doubt it even does, since only certain organizations can actually issue the takedown requests (I can't find details on how the law is implemented, but it certainly doesn't allow random rightsholders like you or I to issue blocking requests).

All kinds of games, including just released AAA games. The only ones that don't work are a handful of multi-player games that use highly intrusive kernel level anti-cheat (mostly the anti-cheat works on Linux, the developers just refuse to support it). Think CoD, Battlefield, League of Legends. Everything else? Works great, sometimes better than Windows. About the only thing not well supported is HDR, but that's improved a lot too.

Because the processed food companies deliberately design their products to be as addictive as possible. As a society we (correctly) recognize that drug dealers bear some responsibility when users overdose on drugs, and cigarette companies have lost lawsuits because they knowingly sold an addictive and dangerous product while pretending it was perfectly healthy. Processed food companies are doing the same, even deliberately targeting children. Their products may not be *as* harmful as drugs or cigarettes, but they are still harmful and deliberately addictive, and they ought to bear some of the social responsibility for the damage their product has done (since they reaped **all** the profits). "Privatize the profits, socialize the losses" has been going on for a looooong time in this country, and it's pushed this country to (and perhaps past) it's breaking point. Freedom of choice is all well and good, but it requires people to be properly informed, and to actually have a choice (which many people, especially those living in food deserts, who tend to be poor and not well educated to begin with, do not).

It's called the ballpoint pen. It's a vastly superior writing instrument to the quills in use before that, and overcomes many of the issues cursive writing was designed to solve (mainly splattering of ink, which happens with any dip pen when you lift off the page). Proficient cursive is still faster than print (in theory, at least) but it's also technically more challenging, so in practice cursive will end up being slower unless you hand write a lot. It's also way easier to read bad print than it is bad cursive, so again unless you're a competent handwriter who writes a lot, cursive makes very little sense.

No, a great score means you take on various kinds of debt and pay it off reliably. The biggest risk with any loan is the lendee defaulting, as that means the loan value drops to pennies on the dollar (even if collections can recoup the money, that's expensive and long process). A high score means the risk of that is (nominally) fairly low Lenders don't care much if you prepay a mortgage or student loan, that's cash they can reloan out. In fact paying off loans off completely often lowers your score for a bit, since it can drop maximum age of credit lines and mix of credit.

Ports are sometimes worse than translated version, because the port is subject to developer errors. Technically WINE's translation is too, but an error there would be more obvious as it would have widespread effects. I've actually switched to the Windows version on a few games that had native Linux releases because the Windows version ran better. And after 2 years gaming exclusively on Linux, I've encountered exactly 1 game (nuclear dawn) that didn't run flawlessly, usually out of the box. A few required command line settings, and getting HDR working can be a pain, but I rarely even check ProtonDB to make sure a game will work before I buy it. One caveat: I don't really play multiplayer games, those tend to be an exception due to draconian anti-cheat (but I wouldn't play with that anti-cheat anyways, so IMO it's a good thing those don't work on Linux).

As weird as it sounds, relativity is actually the *simple* physics explanation. The principle behind relativity is one single thing: that the laws of physics are the same in all reference frames (for special relativity, that's only true in non-accelerated frames, general relativity expands that to all frames). The math that follows from that can be horrendously complicated, but saying that the laws of physics of the "real" universe must result in simple math is just... absurd. And impossible. Even simple mathematical forms (like Newtonian gravity) result in incredibly complex math (like the 3 body problem).

They can't. Oh technically you could build black body radiators to do it, but they would need to be kilometers in size, maybe many kilometers, though to be fair so would your solar panel arrays so it might not be a total showstopper. There are so many issues with the idea of data centers in space I'm not even sure cooling is the biggest. The idea only makes sense if you simulatenously own a space launch company and don't have the first clue about physics or engineering. So, you know, Bezos. I think even Musk knows enough engineering to not propose an idea this monumentally stupid. About the only way it'd start to make sense is if we could manufacture the centers in space, but we're probably 50 years away from that, maybe more.

They probably do go after wine or spirits drinkers too, but the "study" (such as it is) was conducted at a music festival, which tends to have a lot of beer but relatively little wine or spirits.

He said Apple was one example, he didn't say they were the *only* example. Samsung are also greedy assholes who try to lock you into their ecosystem.

Ah you're right, this isn't a micro LED tv, it's just a mini LED tv with more zones than normal. In my defense, the naming is clearly *meant* to confuse the technologies. The LEDs are micron scale so not technically a lie, just misleading.

Nearly everything. The only thing it has in common with that is they're both large digital TVs. Mini LEDs use a relatively large array of LEDs as backlights (typically in the thousands), with a pretty conventional LCD panel providing the actually display technology. That allows for good local dimming, but at core they're still an LCD tv. Micro LED TVs use individual LEDs for every single pixel (so millions of LEDs, not thousands). This is similar to OLED displays, which do the same thing, but OLEDs use organic LEDs, which have a number of significant drawbacks (like burn-in, relatively low peak brightness, and issues with heat dissipation). MicroLED displays use classical LEDs, just tiny, and theoretically have basically *no* drawbacks, aside from the current gobsmackingly high price (which should go down as the tech matures).

The motion here is a mix of two things, motion relative to the lab (caused by external forces) and internal motions from thermal effects (caused by the temperature of the spheres, essentially it's atoms jiggling back and forth). They used an optical trap to suppress both, essentially both cooling and levitating the spheres using lasers. The remaining motion is mostly due to quantum excitations, which is interesting, because those are hard to observe in objects bigger than a couple of atoms. Not immediately useful, but interesting, and could become useful eventually.