Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:D.o.g.e. (Score 1) 179

And the climate has the deciding vote, yes. No nation has immunity from the consequences. Britain has just gone through a heatwave hotter than the most severe summer on record. In May. This matters - a lot - because most of our water comes from snowpacks formed during the winter. We are in for a really bad summer and it is likely we'll suffer significant deaths from both running out of water and - after summer breaks - the inevitable catastrophic floods that will follow.

I doubt anywhere in Europe will fare better.

Russia has expended all its resources (and those of several other nations) on an incredibly stupid war and therefore has nothing to put in place to handle any climate emergency they might suffer. Of course, it's also possible that one of the reactors in Ukraine will explode. If the prevailing winds are blowing into Russia at the time, that could be really inconvenient.

It's hard to tell if the global stupidity is priceless or worthless. Depends on how many can survive it.

Comment Re:Lazy cowards? Really? (Score 1) 179

Then why didn't they work collectively to put someone on the ballot they could vote for? I mean, let's face it - the two top parties manage around 50% of the vote in each election out of 60% of the people. So they only really have support from 30% of the nation each. Your alternative has the potential to win 40% of the people, pushing both the alternatives so far out of the picture that both parties will be forced to choose between oblivion or reality.

But you don't.

Why?

It's not about money, the 40% who aren't voting aren't voting less because of how much each side spends. All you need is to be known. And lots of people manage that daily.

So what is it about? It's about the fact that what you're saying is nothing but excuses and you know it.There isn't an option that 40% of the nation will like, because 100% of the nation is determined to hate anyone different to them.

Comment Re:He's right (Score 2) 27

Bluesky knows full well it's not operating a real federated service

Better tell that to Blacksky, Eurosky, etc.

The vast majority of people stay on the primary PDS, relay, etc namely because Bluesky hasn't proven itself to be some evil overlord pursuing insidious goals. If that were to ever occur, people would just migrate. Unlike with ActivityPub (Mastodon), ATProto allows for true migration. Your content isn't tied and linked to a specific server - it's more like a URL on an arbitrary domain, and you can just change the "domain" (the PDS). Everything is timestamped and cryptographically signed, so if you download a backup of your content, you can just reupload it somewhere else and it continues to remain linked into the whole ecosystem.

More to the point, primary Bluesky servers have gone down and third parties like Blacksky remained operational, very much demonstrating that the network is federated.

Also, re: this from the header:

" and by the end of October last year, it had reportedly seen a 40% drop in daily mobile active users over the past 12 months."

... is cherry picking. If you graph users, you'll see that - like most sites - new users tend to arrive in big "spikes", triggered either by events at other social media platforms, or major news cycles (such as elections). Most new users to a site are not "sticky". Some drop off in days, some in weeks, some in months, etc, but this slowly levels out, and the rest are "sticky". With Bluesky, usually half or so of new users stick around, which is an unusually high percentage. If you measure from a new-arrivals spike, of course you see a "dropoff", but you see that for any site. The question is, how is the long-term trend of users that stick around? If you cancel out the spike pattern, Bluesky has a long-term population of around 600k daily posters / 1M daily likers / 300k daily followers.

What you can say is there haven't been any big new user spikes since late 2024 / early 2025. That said, there kinda was some serious news going on in late 2024 / early 2025....

Comment Re:What I'm reading (Score 2) 48

1) You said "AI hype is dying", not "AI companies aren't profitable" Undergoing an insane sustained ~10x/yr exponential growth trajectory over 3 1/2 years , and that rate even accelerating now, is in no way "dying"

2) It is absolutely not normal for companies undergoing rapid rates of growth, let alone such an insane rate, to be profitable. Scaleup generally means you lose money hand-over-fist, as scaleup is extremely expensive (no less so in this field!). And yet:

3) Anthropic may actually pull it off this quarter.

Their margins are like 40%. That's all users combined, not just paying users. Inference is cheap to serve; compare what the closed commercial operators like Anthropic charge vs. what the open source models (an actually competitive for-profit marketplace) charge, for models of equivalent size. The closed models rob you blind. But people pay it because their models are the best.

(BTW, the main thing that's driving it now isn't random people asking questions on the website or in an app in their phone. It's software developers).

Comment Re:What I'm reading (Score 1) 48

Here's the crazy thing: initially, SpaceX / X.AI didn't acquire the servers. Tesla had the contract for them, and then Tesla just gave those rights to X.AI. Tesla is a public company, while X.AI was Musk's private company, founded so that he wouldn't have to share any AI profits with Tesla.

Now, Musk's excuse was that Tesla's datacentre wasn't ready yet, and it cost Tesla nothing. But of course, there was a massive backlog on servers; the rights to early delivery of servers was incredible value. It let X.AI jump to the head of the line. Tesla could have sold those servers or the rights to them at a huge markup.

Comment Re:I'm not convinced (Score 2) 46

Drones are specifically the male bees. Most bees are not drones.

That's not what I said. I said that the word "drone", as in a mindless unthinking being, is derived from drones, as in male bees. I did not say "all bees are drone bees".

And an individual bee has limited memory. They even forget which hive they are from after a while if they don't return to it.

You are confusing "forgetting" with "disruption".

Bees have both a geospatial "mental map" (based on landmarks, the sun, etc) and a chemical fingerprint (they recognize their nestmates' smell). Concerning their geospatial memory, not only is it not poor, the main problem with it is that it's too stubborn. If you move a hive 20 meters away, the bees will fly back to the same empty location where their hive used to be and wait there. They don't adapt well to change because they have a long-term memory of "the hive was here".

If a beekeeper wants to move a hive, they have to trigger an "orientation flight" to get the bees to learn the new location (this typically involves locking them inside their hive for several days to disrupt their routine). During an orientation flight, the bees will learn the new hive location, and then they'll subbornly remember that location long-term, even if you move the hive again.

As for recognizing their nestmates, this is again based on smell. A bee being isolated for days or weeks will still be recognized by guard bees at the entrance and welcomed in. However, guards will sometimes let in bees that don't belong to that hive as well, if e.g. they're passive and laden with pollen and nectar; they haven't "forgotten" their scent, they're just "forgiving" of mistakes if there's a reward to be had (bees sometimes make navigation errors, esp. if all nest boxes are similar in shape/colour or due to wind, and enter the wrong hive)

I'll repeat: bees do NOT have a short memory. This is a myth. It's not true. The very example you gave is actually an example of bee memory being too rigid.

Slashdot Top Deals

Always leave room to add an explanation if it doesn't work out.

Working...