Well that's it, I just deleted Google Maps from my phone and installed MapQuest. Google Maps has been getting increasingly annoying over the years--I really hate how it calls out various fast-food restaurants now as I drive by or turn at corners where they're at. It says the name of the stupid chain restaurant instead of street names, wonder how much they're getting paid to do that! It's really irritating, so I'm happy to pull the plug on Google Maps if they're just going to roll over to President Imbecile and his gang of fascist thugs.

I've not had much luck in getting a better understanding on the algorithm used to generate these black hole images -- it sure sounds sounds like it's like similar to that trope in TV shows where a cop says "enhance!" at a blurry picture, and the original noisy image magically becomes much higher resolution.

Isn't this just feeding a handful of data points into a machine learning algorithm (can we please stop calling this stuff "AI" already) and generating an image from that, not entirely dissimilar from DALL-E or Midjourney or etc etc? If that's the case, how can we be certain the end result actually represents what is really there, and that the output image is actually scientifically useful? Or, how certain are we that the output from this algorithm actually reflects reality, and isn't just spitting back out what we think we want to see?

Honestly I trust that these researchers know what they are doing, but the aspect of what exactly the algorithm is doing and why we think it is trustworthy doesn't seem to get much mention.

Not true. I've heard of voting machine attacks where the compromised voting machine will accept a person's ballot, print out a paper copy asking for verification. Now normally if there's an error, the person can go back and void that paper copy and re-vote. However, with this attack, the voter will verify the paper ballot, the machine will tell the voter that everything is done, and then after a few seconds the machine will go back, void the ballot, change a candidate, and print a new paper ballot. Everything looks fine and official, and nobody could ever tell something went wrong, though both the machine and the paper trail have both been cheated. Doing this attack on only a few percent of the votes wouldn't set off any warning signs for anyone looking at the votes after the fact, but would be enough to throw an election.

I don't think there's any way that e-voting can be secure than plain paper voting.

I'm surprised to see "variable" at such a low percentage (4% right now). I've got a laptop as my main computer, which I do have an extra screen for at home, but I also do a lot of my work *not* at home, leaving me with the one built-in laptop screen. Are there really so few people with good-quality laptops that they can use as a main computer here?