Lab grown meat is initially formed in thin sheets, right? So isnâ(TM)t flattening cows exactly what weâ(TM)d be doing?

I donâ(TM)t understand people who respond to points about ethics by chirping about legal principles. Like.. is the law really your model for proper behavior? Itâ(TM)s all good unless you do something so evil that your society bands together to punish you?

"Justice" is revenge wearing a dignified suit.

Cool. Please give us some examples of specific situations youâ(TM)ve been in when you were going to murder another person, where (at least in the moment) you felt that it was the right and justified thing to do, and the ONLY thing that made you put the knife down was your fear of punishment. Not moral or social qualms, just your own cowardice.

  â¦what's that? You're not that sort of person? But you so confidently predict the behavior of those who are!

"Yes, we detained this person without anything even approaching probable cause. But in our defense, we were trying to detain a WHOLE BUNCH of people without probable cause."

...aaand I misread your post. Yeah, no, it's an overhyped press release.

Nuclear fission is dirty. Its waste products need to be carefully and securely stored for thousands of years. Don't get me wrong -- it's one of the cleanest options we currently have for scalable power generation -- but it's dirty dirty dirty. Fusion's waste products are safe and non-radioactive.

Oh, and even disregarding waste products, it's safer. Not entirely safe, but a fusion reactor explodes, nobody outside the blast radius is going to be hurt, ever. If a fisison reactor melts down, the place where that fission reactor was, automatically becomes a permanent synonym for "environmental catastrophe". Have you ever heard of this town in Eastern Europe called Chernobyl? I have too! So will our great great grandchildren.

If you tried to design a power source which was as scary as possible, you'd end up with nuclear fission. Again, it's one of the best options we have. But it's awful compared to fusion.

And how many of them canâ(TM)t read the Spanish translation?

Batygin, K., and Adams, F.C. You Think Jupiter's Big Now: Lemme Tell You, Back In MY Day. In Nat Astron (2025).

That'll be the day.

To my thinking, the most fascinating aspect of this is how we didn't already know. Humans have had noses for, like, decades now; you would think that (a) we would already have quite a good handle on what they can and can't do, and (b) those capabilities would be intuitively and straightforwardly testable, in equivalent circumstances to how they would be naturally used. It didn't require a great leap of logic to make an eye chart, or to play quiet sounds into headphones... but testing this required nontrivial mechanical and biomedical engineering work.

It seems a little like this capability is "vestigial, but only just". As in, you wouldn't have to backtrack very far through the primates to find one that could do this, knew it could do it, and needed to do it... and despite that we don't really, there hasn't been enough time for genetic bit-rot to set in and screw up the fundamental ability.

That's not how it works, no. The browser asks the server to authenticate; the server gives it a single-use challenge, the browser passes the challenge to the password manager, which produces a response; the browser returns the response to the server. The browser never has the keys that would be necessary to respond to the passkey challenge.

It's just the opposite. Every time you paste a password into a browser, you're trusting it (and the site, and any plugins with permissions) not to leak it. With passkeys that is not a concern.

Hahahaha, oh god. Thereâ(TM)s gonna be actual early adopters for this, the poor sods. Theyâ(TM)re gonna have this thing in their head for decades, until they die and get buried with it. And itâ(TM)s gonna keep its value about as well as a Segway-mounted fax machine.

Yeah, who wants to eat at HOP?

MwcDwnwyllds.