smaller, deep-sea organisms ... named conjecture.

Exactly. There are many different learning styles. (One issue I had with school is I don't learn like most people - several learning disabilities/issues - so I'm aware of the differences and how things need to be altered, but for most students, yes, repetition within that first 24 hours is important.)

I haven't been in the classroom since close to the year 2000, so I don't remember the study names. What I do remember is that there were studies, plural - studies, that showed that when you learn how to do a new task or learn new information, that using that information or practicing the task within 24 hours increases the chance of it being remembered by a large percentage. That's over 25 years ago for me, and I'm not going to claim it's at a certain percentage, but I know it was WELL over 50%. So if you learn a new process in Algebra, or a new move in ballroom dance, and you don't practice it within 24 hours, you have a lower chance of remembering it. But it was at least over a 50% increase in your chance of remembering it IF you reinforced it by going through it within 24 hours.

I preferred to use homework as practice - not as learning new material (although that might help if it includes reading for the next day's class). I also worked in psych treatment, which meant I taught more than one subject - I had the odd mix of science and math plus English (lit and grammar). So I'd assign reading overnight that gave us more chance for discussion (discussion, not lecture!), and the math I assigned was to use what we had learned in class. For science, I'd actually prefer to assign reading for what we had done that day, compared to what we would do the next day. That way students found the reading easier, it went faster, and they'd bring in a few questions the next day that we could review (before moving on to new material).

When I grew up, I was forced to go to a prep school where we had 3 or more hours of homework a night, plus we were required to stay for some form of athletics, so I rarely got home before 6 PM. With that in mind, I was selective about homework. For the time I was teaching in public schools (as opposed to my time teaching in treatment), the dept. heads and supervisors jumped on me for not giving enough homework or for assigning science material we had reviewed in class - pretty much everything about my homework system offended the dept heads or supervisors.

If people didn't love them they wouldn't sell them. People around me are obsessed with giant trucks.

Ok, shut down data centers and AI farms first. Then I'll consider it.

Ads? Never saw that many, now I only see ONE on the page at all.

Guess you haven't heard of Brave and are still being tracked all over the internet,then.

The US has been afraid of those "nefarious Asians" for over a hundred years now.

Replace it with homegrown spyware

If it does cause cancer, it would have to be a very weak cause -- otherwise, the many studies done would clearly show it.

In any event, that kind of *is* what this case is about -- there's not really any significant evidence that RoundUp does cause cancer (at best, it's a *maybe*), and that sort of evidence is found in scientific studies, not in courtrooms.

But that lack of evidence won't stop the lawsuits -- sure, it makes the lawsuits weaker, but every person with cancer is a potential lawsuit against Monsanto, and juries don't necessarily *need* evidence that RoundUp causes cancer -- instead, an expert witness gets up there and tells them it's possible, and they think of the big faceless corporation and the person dying of cancer and their heartstrings make a decision rather than the evidence.

Monsanto may be a $15B/year company, but even that's not enough to pay all the people who accuse it of causing their cancers. And yet RoundUp is a vitally important tool for farmers worldwide, often used instead of nastier pesticides *known* to cause cancer -- even if it was found to cause cancer, it's so important to agriculture worldwide that we'd probably keep on using it.

They are doing everything they can to drive me away from their platforms. My main use of FB at this point is to stay in communication with some people and a couple of special interest groups I run.

In other words, "MS has invested so much into the AI boondoggle that everyone had better jump on board before I lose my bonuses and stock options."

Well, that isn't too hot. My kiln, in my barn, was running a firing last night that got just about that hot for cone 6 pottery and it can do cone 10, even hotter.

It'll take more than a furnace that can do what the average potter's kiln can do before it sounds impressive.

Good luck with that with the cuts they've made to NASA and the general contempt for science in this administration. It would likely just be a way to funnel huge amounts of taxpayer money to a few favored companies. Like, ummmm, SpaceX.

And militarize it.

The corruption runs deep with Trump Inc.