The first computers were extremely good, that's why they built them. Before that, tabulating machines were also extremely useful.

If you're going to make an analogy, make it factual.

This is the kind of stunt you do if you want people to believe in your vaporware. Instead of releasing actual stats about your battery, or simply building a mass scale factory, you put it into a little airplane. Small commercial electric planes are here now and you can buy them.

Wikipedia has a list of companies that claim they have invented solid state batteries, but none of them have entered scalable production. Another sign of vaporware.

There is no reason to prefer solid state batteries. It's just another battery technology, with charge times, weight, temperature safety ranges, mechanical stress limits, etc. If another battery technology gets you the better numbers in those metrics, then use the other battery technology. If the solid state battery does better, then prefer that.

Solid state isn't magic fairy dust.

I assume once they go public, the hype will kind of die down.

Either that or it will become more shrill, as hot air is passed through a narrower and narrower factual space.

... a post-cyberpunk post-scarcity economy. If he only achieves half of what he's pushing for that wealth won't mean that much. It's precisely that he's acting that way that puts him in a position to be this wealthy. The final goal of capitalism is to make itself obsolete. We might actually be getting there just now. Musk being a trillionaire is just an intermediate step on that scale.

Humor is the only thing that gets me through the day, along with amphetamines.

But no Blackjack, it's mathematically solved.

Nice, you figured it out.

I've suspected they were overbuilding/overpromising but I couldn't find the hard data to be sure.

No LOL. These datacenters don't employ many local residents. They wouldn't be getting the money.

They're not replacing them with software, they're just firing them. The AI is an excuse.

It's been happening:

I don't think AI deserves the blame, though.

Otherwise, the executives will have to admit they are wrong, which is career suicide. If you admit you were wrong, another executive can use that admission to backstab you.

Didn't you read the summary?

This yet-uncreated-technology has perfectly understood capabilities, and will benefit you greatly.

The original point was, "Trump is bad with pardons."

Your point seems to be, "Yes Trump is bad, but Biden was worse."

So you agree, Trump is bad.

Only if you treat them like shit.

Effects.

Treating women like shit makes them not want to pump out babies. Now they have a choice, so they are doing a lot less of it. Literally all it would take to get a large portion (a majority IMO) of them to do it without support from a decent partner would be to gracefully and quietly fund the programs that ensure they will be able to feed and provide medical care for their children even if their circumstances change, but there seems to be a problem even meeting that bar.

But then your entire fucking point becomes pointless about 8 seconds later, literally before I could read it and roll my eyes about it.

Except it doesn't. It's shit all day. It makes people upset all day. This means it's costing productivity all day. See, in the real world with real humans, these user pain points have real impacts on those real people.

HTH, HAND!