No, I'm being appropriately pedantic for a physics question. When you have a capacitor charged to 100V and another is connected in parallel to it the usual implication is that this too will be charged to 100V since connecting something in parallel implies the same pd across the device. If the capacitor were already disconnected from the external power then parallel and series have no meaning since they would both be the same as your circuit now consists of just two capacitors.

Thus, in specifying parallel the question is either saying that the EMF is still connected or, at worst, it is heavily implying it.

The reason why air travel is the safest way to travel is because the aircraft are kept MILES apart in all directions, as directed by air traffic control.

Most air accidents happen with small two-seat private planes that don't follow those same rules.
And many more accidents happen on the roads, where vehicles are even closer to one-another.

Risk has two dimensions: likelihood and magnitude of outcome. The above is about likelihood.
An aircraft accident practically always has a deadly outcome, whereas a car accident doesn't always.

Maximise both likelihood and outcome, and you've got disaster.

Until the tools get better, yes. Slavery would likely have ended by now even without the Civil War because of the cotton picker. The same thing is happening to the remaining agricultural jobs now, thanks to AI.

Strawberry picking robots are already good enough to do the job, just with a ridiculously high up-front cost (like $300k each, which is probably well over a hundred years worth of labor costs, and possibly several hundred). The next generation are going to be more like $12k, which is more like 20 years of labor costs, assuming $4 per hour sub-minimum wage, 40 hours a week, and 4 weeks of picking in a year, and more like 5 years at U.S. minimum wage.

But that's not the whole story. The latest generation are also faster than people, and can work 24x7, so you can use less than a third as many. So now you're at more like a year or two for break-even.

Heck, it wouldn't surprise me if all the screaming from California about lack of farm labor isn't just a cover story, all while quietly letting the Trump administration reduce the immigrant farm labor because they won't be needed in the future. It makes the left look good to their base by paying lip service to defending them while making the right look good to their base by terrorizing them and scaring them out of the country. And it wouldn't surprise me if some of the farm tech companies building these picking machines aren't actively lobbying for it. I mean, maybe that's happening a few years too soon, but we're not talking about decades before that labor no longer provides any real benefit; we're getting very close to that point.

If it happens, it at least isn't an actively bad idea like the touch bar was.

I unfortunately have a (last-gen Intel) MacBook Pro with a touch bar. Even after several years, I am constantly accidentally triggering things I don't want... it's just too easy to graze the touchbar when you're hitting a number key. And before you say "just map it to function keys" - all that will accomplish is to change what I'm accidentally triggering.

Enhancement: Just like all politicians.

Just like most humans.

The overnight flights are one thing. The problem I have is on the westward flights across the Atlantic which are day flights: they take off in the morning and land in the early afternoon. I've often had the window partially open on those flights, especially if you are flying over Iceland or Greenland and the weather is clear since the view is spectacular and exposure to sunlight is the best way to minimize jet lag.

I rarely, if ever get questioned by cabin crew when I'm doing that and even when I am questioned I explain I'm looking at the view and they just ask that I close the window when I'm finished which I do. The problem is that with the 787 cabin crew now will refuse to let you open the window at all on daytime flights. Part of the problem may be that with a mechanical blind I can open it enough to see without having to open it entirely but on the 787 it's either all or nothing and the windows are larger too.

Really? The article points out that the amount of light we generate has more than doubled since 2011 and somehow I don't feel that human happiness levels have increased or that crime has decreased and while perhaps social activity has increased a fair amount of that seems to be people protesting about how unhappy they are so I'm not sure it helps your claim.

See that's the opposite of what we actually need to do. Realistically, the average person gets maybe five or six usable hours in a day, so right now, work gets five of those blocks and we get two. With that scheme, work gets six of those blocks and we get one.

A better plan is four five-hour work days. One extra usable day for ourselves, plus working hours tailored to knowledge workers' actual ability to focus rather than longer hours in which productivity rapidly goes towards zero or even negative.

Spend half as much time working, and everyone will be healthier. More daylight hours to be outside and get exercise. More time to spend with friends and family and de-stress. And so on.

I've been in the "Permanent Daylight Saving Time" camp for a long time. However, I'll be retiring soon... so at this point I really don't care. Change nothing or change everything... blessedly I'll be away from it.

The problems with the question you stated have nothing to do with ideal capacitors. Your first problem is that you have 'x' as a charge to start with and then as an energy at the end. Then there is the problem that if your first capacitor is charged to 100V and a second is placed _in parallel_ with it that too will be charged to 100V, not 9.1V since connecting something in parallel implies that you are connecting it to an external EMF such that the potential difference across the components is the same as opposed to in series when the current through both is the same.

I am guessing that what you meant to say is that the initial capacitor was charged to 100V and that the _energy_ stored was 'x'. Then you disconnect the original capacitor from the external voltage and connect the new capacitor across its terminals and now the voltage drops. I'm not sure that the AI will do any better with the corrected questions but at least you will have given it a question that it is possible to answer.

Then you haven't been listening.

Most people aren't in control of their own schedules - it's as simple as that.

Honestly, I'd rather Apple:

• Enable full support for macOS on iPad
• Make a detachable trackpad/keyboard combination
• Make it so that you can detach and reattach it in a position that leaves the keyboard inactive and underneath the iPad

But yeah, a hinge that can let you A. open it flat and B. spin the display around and close the laptop so that it looks and acts like a thick tablet would also work.

But the biggest thing I'd like is for Apple to get Back-to-my-Mac working. I do not want to store my data in the Cloud, but I do want access to it — terabytes of it — far more than I could ever realistically hope to store in iCloud. (Translation: No, I will not pay you $1200 per year for Cloud storage, and even that wouldn't really be enough. Yikes.)

Yes, coral has survived a far warmer planet but that warming happened at a much slower rate than today's human-induced changes and that could definitely cause problems for coral since it is a not incredibly mobile and will take time to migrate and it is not clear that it can migrate quickly enough. However, that suggests that some of the damage could be mitigated by transplanting coral ourselves and it would be nice to see mitigation strategies like this explored by the experts instead of just the doom and gloom.

Perhaps not by themselves, but what if we gave them a helping hand transplanting them to waters that have become warm enough to sustain them? We know that coral survive a much warmer planet because it has done so in the past. The only difference now is that the rate of warming is much greater so if we helped them by transplanting them deliberately it seems like that would let them survive.