Kinda terrifying these pressure vessels ended up on their coast. If they fell off during a launch window, coastal authorities in most nations do try to keep the launch path clear to prevent any potential harm. But if these fell off an existing satellite and survived, that could have been deadly if they hit a cargo ship. I am curious if they're going to release the name of the owner. There's not much as far as launches around Australia. There's RocketLab over in Auckland, New Zealand. I have a buddy who worked there and they've done some amazing stuff. Could be one of theirs.

Weird snowman brah

Yea it sounds like marketing fluff. Unless they can gather a lot of solar power, it seems like any attempt to thrust to the moon would take several months or years. I wonder if they even have such a test planned? Maybe at the end of their chart in the "if we somehow have a lot of left over money" phase.

For totalitarians, need to identify people is critical. It's why DPRK is indeed democratic and holds elections where Kim wins every single time.

Because voters are identifiable.

This is why 16 gig slow GPUs are more expensive right now than very fast 12 gig ones. More RAM means bigger model can be fit into memory. Also why 24 gig models are unobtainium.

4090s and 5090s have been long used for narrow models in things like research in much of third world. This is the natural next step. Shrinking models further so they can be operated from phones that already have good enough cameras to enable things like discriminating vision, where model helps identify specific things that camera looks at. We're looking at the next big ag breakthrough in marginal places like Sahel. We now have an actually good chance of AI machine vision doing something we just couldn't do with mere human vision and algorithmic machine vision. Identification of pests and weeds, their eggs and larvae, etc.

And in medium to long term, it looks even better. We may have an actual viable chance of eradicating Tsetse in medium term future with AI vision. One of the main reasons why Sub-Saharan Africa is still absolutely fucked in terms of human development may actually be finally removed.

X's "automatically translate into your language" feature has actually rebuilt the tower of Babel. The main barrier in interpersonal communication came crashing down.

I suspect that minors can to an extent form contracts. For example, to buy anything from a store, you have to fulfill a contract (money for product). This does not require parental intervention. They can take on a summer job. Same thing.

Parental intervention only comes when there are contractual violations (i.e. minor shoplifts, parents are on the hook for at least some if not all of the damages). Though in some cases/places, parental acceptance can be required for taking on a job as a minor.

So the argument they're making is most certainly legally sound in this aspect. The point of contention is going to be "how much can a minor contractually agree to on his/her own" and "with this much additional obligations, how can amount of obligations for each contract be verified".

The whole thing is a horrible mess because before ease of access granted by computerization and proliferation of networking of computers, most contractual obligations required some kind of face to face verification of basics. When you applied for a summer job as a teen, you got into an interview where your identity got verified.

Meanwhile today, the issue is that due to aforementioned factors, we now have countless contracts that are made without parties ever encountering each other in a face to face situation. This seems to be, on a fundamental level, an attempt to get something that is as close to "face to face" as can be generated in age of social media. I.e. other party gets to at least verify if you're specially protected kind of a human (minor), or one that is fully legally responsible for him/herself. Something that used to be done face to face for each contract that extended significant legal obligations for both parties.

But it's clumsy to the extreme, which is likely the main reason why it's being fought over. Essentially instead of "protecting the companies from having unknowingly taken on additional obligation of contracting with a minor", which the legislation purportedly is trying to do, it instead just punishes everyone who isn't a minor (both users and companies) by forcing companies to assume that unless proven otherwise, everyone has those additional obligations of contracting with a minor.

At this point, nobody truly at the top of this space is expecting any kind of return at all. This is endgame for the economy as a whole. Sam "Alternate-man" and Dario are likely fully away of the government and banking interests that are pushing hard for a total and complete financial collapse to replace the dollar, euro, ruble and other major currencies with new digital currencies; money that can be programmed to only be spendable on certain categories of goods.

The collapse is coming soon, but it won't be what anyone is expecting. Our economy is about to evaporate.

./ is an ancient website from the old web, probably still written in Perl, and is filled with dragons and limited clipart assets.

After Hogwarts Legacy on disc didn't contain the damn game was when I finally got around to hacking my PS4 Pro:

https://battlepenguin.com/gami...

My PS5 has been disconnected from the Internet for over a year but it still has firmware 10.40. The only hack is using a Lua exploit and the only physical disc that can do it was a Limited Run Star Wars game that now goes for over $400 on eBay. The digital version could do it too, but Sony, not only patched the exploit, but changed the store so that all new games purchased have a 30 day expiration window so they can force patch updates.

That's right. When you purchase a digital game on PS5, if you get disconnected from the Internet for a month, the game stops working. Not sure if you can just turn back the system clock either.

Fuck Sony and piracy is now 100% fully justified.

Every state has gas companies. That's not the point. It's not anywhere near as common in Florida as it is in the North East corridor. In Chicago, nearly every apartment has gas stoves and even gas dryers.

You're right. This is about creating new "carbon markets" and pumping money into such frauds. It doesn't stop pollution and is all based around the religion of global warming.

It's intentional. I think this was all a show and, to some extent, a psychological operation.

I think this was all for show for both Anthropic and the government. It pushes the "scary A.I." narrative, and gives Antrhopic the excuse it needs to require your government ID. I wrote about this before:

https://battlepenguin.com/tech...

and about the government ID scans:

https://battlepenguin.com/tech...

It's important to read the actual decision to understand the arguments instead of just shrieking for your political sports team.

It has long been established that federal courts may not issue “advisory opinions” that do not bear on the rights of the litigants before them. Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U. S. 472, 477 (1990). At the appellate stage, this prin ciple means that courts should resolve only those questions on which a favorable ruling would provide a litigant redress from the judgment below. See Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media, 588 U. S. 427, 432–433 (2019). The question on which the Court granted certiorari in this case cannot satisfy this requirement under any colorable view of the law. The Court should therefore decline to answer it. Okello Chatrie’s ongoing stake in this case stems from his conviction for robbing a bank and brandishing a firearm. On appeal, Chatrie challenged those convictions on only one ground. He argued that the District Court erred in denying his motion to suppress the fruits of the geofence procedure Cite as: 609 U. S. ____ (2026) ALITO, J., dissenting

3 that led to his identification as the bank robber.1 So, unless he can show that this evidence should be suppressed, he cannot obtain any relief. And his chances of making the showing needed to justify suppression are virtually zero. The police obtained information about Chatrie’s location at the time of the robbery pursuant to a warrant issued by a neutral magistrate. And when evidence is obtained under such a warrant, a defendant seeking suppression must overcome the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. United States v. Leon, 468 U. S. 897, 923 (1984). A majority of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, sitting en banc, held that Chatrie could not do so. 136 F. 4th 100, 101 (2025) (Diaz, C. J., concurring); id., at 114 (Niemeyer, J., concurring); id., at 115 (King, J., concurring); id., at 115, n. 1 (Winn, J., concurring in judgment); id., at 142 (Hey tens, J., concurring). That holding suffices to affirm the District Court’s admission of the geofence evidence and thus independently supports the Fourth Circuit’s judg ment. Accordingly, any review by this Court should concern an issue that could at least plausibly disturb that good-faith holding. Cf. Stewart v. IHT Ins. Agcy. Group, LLC, 990 F. 3d 455, 457 (CA6 2021).

On this score, today’s decision fails. The majority does not dispute the Fourth Circuit’s good-faith analysis, and nothing in its opinion casts a shred of doubt on that holding. See ante, at 10, n. 4. To overcome the good-faith exception, Chatrie would need to show that either (1) the affidavit sup porting the geofence warrant was knowingly or recklessly

4 CHATRIE v. UNITED STATES ALITO, J., dissenting false, (2) the magistrate rubber-stamped the warrant appli cation, (3) the affidavit was “‘bare bones,’” or (4) the war rant application was so facially deficient that no reasonable officer would rely on it. Leon, 468 U. S., at 923, and n. 24. Yet nothing in the majority opinion touches on any of these matters. Thus, nothing in today’s decision bears on the Fourth Circuit’s good-faith holding. And because that hold ing independently supports the judgment below, the Court’s opinion is advisory.2 This outcome was guaranteed as soon as this Court granted certiorari. ...

This case doesn't meaningfully change anything about the defendants situation. It will get sent back to the lower courts, but there is still quite a ways to go to get any of the other evidence thrown out as fruit from the poisoned tree.

You people should really read the decision.s