Federal regulations are stupid level: they are owned by lobbyists and megacorps.

Send this to the states.

Fork it. Not that it hasn't beendone already...

Regulators should be afraid of weaponized Ai. So should censors. So should monopolists.

All of the things the State has done in the past 500 years has been corrupt and bureaucratic and caused harm. All. Not most, but all.

All of the people who supported it, from monopolists to lobbyists to activists caused harm.

Ai is undoing it all. Not piece by piece but all at once.

I, for one, can't wait to see folks zapped for restraining voluntary behavior.

Is it warming? Probably (hard to tell with all the 'smoothing' and 'adjusting' of data going on, but I'd agree it probably is.)
Is it driven by humans? Utterly not, though almost certainly we're aggravating it.
Is it faster than ever, historically speaking? Utterly not.

That said, this sort of nonsense catastrophism is welcome; it shows to everyone how hilariously unhinged the doomsayers have become.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... = 90% of the last 500m years has been warmer than today.

For the last 5m years we've routinely had warm spikes followed by a decline to Phanerozoic 'norm' - if anything, this proves climate is NOT chaotically sensitive outside of some magic average (which just happens to be the 20th century, weird!) but in fact astonishingly robust. If you STILL insist that somehow the climate is going to spin into some Venusian disaster, please explain how whatever feedback mechanisms that have 30x-50x canceled the warmth surges have now somehow broken down and won't work this time?

Looking forward to the responses. There are a lot of people on slashdot who seem to have a lot of psychoses invested in global warming being irrefutable.

Countries in which women have full control over their reproduction (ie full access to abortion) population growth has tended to fall below replacement values.

The correct meaning of that sentence is that most particle accelerators are unable to steer two particle beams to crash head-on into one another.

Then it's utter bullshit. Probably by count most accelerators were either not intended to generate collisions at all or were fixed target accelerators. In either case there was only a single beam so talk about steering two beams is foolish. "Most accelerators are unable to steer two beams" would have been sufficient.

Once we went past the CoM energies that are reasonably achievable with a fixed target accelerator we needed colliders. Most colliders could only operate with a single mass of particle.

I'm pretty sure by count that most colliders could only accelerate electrons/positrons but again, as CoM requirements increase, e-e collisions become less productive.

If we're talking heavy ion accelerators, then yes, there are only two colliders currently in operation currently capable of colliding heavy ions, but that's all of the hadron colliders in operation. I don't know how many fixed target heavy ion accelerators there might be.

I would guess that there will be no hadron collider built in the future that couldn't collide heavy ions. It may not be possible to supply them with heavy ions as it may not be deemed worth building the infrastructure to do that, but if so, that will be a political decision to save a few hundred million on a multi billion machine, not a scientific decision.

It's almost as if the deportations aren't the problem. Maybe one day you'll figure this out.

This is why it's time to end social security.

I look at how much I've paid in over my life, and what it would be worth to me today EVEN IF you took out a lot to take care of the infirm and disabled.

There is no way that 65% of the population needs a full handout, but that's about what I'm paying.

According to this inflation calculator, 2015's $158k would now have be 2025's $214.61. So the actual change is 6%, not 44%.

... are just as pathetic as male gooners.

 

Also, every year someone pops up to say correlation is not causation. It isn't, but it's a damned good place to start. Like if I'm thirsty, standing at a t-junction and all the people walking from the left are carrying fresh new bottles of water and all the people walking from the right look like the last thing they tried to 'drink' is sawdust...it's not 100% proven that there's a place to get water from in one particular direction, but on the other hand...it's pretty damned well correlated and guess which direction I'm going to head in.

Yes, but same mass collisions are trivial, the only requirement is that the accelerator is able to handle the mass.

The main ring at cern requires relativistic particles, it depends on the speed being (almost) constant while accelerating, so depends on the various feeders being able to accelerate Pb to sufficient energy.

And it depends on the magnets being able to contain the higher mass.

So
"Most particle accelerators are unable to steer two particle beams to crash head-on into one another."
is a strange comment. I'm not sure if they meant:
"Most particle accelerators are unable to circulate two particle beams of this mass" or
"Most particle accelerators are unable to be loaded with heavy nuclei"
but it's hard to imagine any accelerator that can meet those requirements not being able to steer the beams to collide.

From the study: " The most pronounced associated differences were observed with intake of approximately 2 to 3 cups per day of caffeinated coffee or 1 to 2 cups per day of tea.".

You heard it - ditch the coffee, drink some tea.

(although, in a small voice, I should probably note that while I am British, I don't drink tea. I drink coffee. Damn.)

I think it's interesting. C compilers aren't that complicated but C is just enough "uncooperative" that neither is it "feed the right file into lex/yacc and it will work". 20K seems cheap.

What I'd really like to see though is what they can do with reverse engineering, binary to C seems eminently sensible, C is low enough level that it can easily reflect the binary code without artificial constructs, but it's also expressive enough that it can express the semantic meaning of the code. And unlike compiling, where the global view matters, decompiling is almost exclusively local in scope.

It's not far off what qemu does when emulating an architecture, but it's really hard to go from that "JIT view" to something that a human can look at, understand, and improve.

We can be absolutely sure that China, the US and other major powers already have "state of the art decompilers" and are using them to seek vulnerabilities in closed source software. We, the people, need to know what "state of the art" really means. Perhaps it's useless in practice, no better than looking at the raw assembly for an expert, or perhaps it's "amazingly good" to the point where an expert doesn't need to know the architecture at all to understand the code.

Back in the 80's vendors promised companies a "paperless office", but cynics noted that the equipment sold always included printers.

Now we're looking at a promise of a post-human-labor era, delivered by armies of human drones performing mountains fo soul-crushing labor.