It's important to remember that not only is "the cloud" just "someone else's computer", but that that computer is a '286 PC with a 20MB MFM hard drive.

Do the Rust developers know that?

The costs of nuclear are addressed all the time.

The problem is the nuke fanbois either ignore the costs or hand-wave them away: "Nuclear is only expensive because of protests and regulations. Next time will be different. Blah, blah, blah."

Even without considering the costs of waste and accidents, nuclear costs four times as much as wind or solar and has a 20-year lead time.

Tens of thousands of barrels of toxic waste were dumped near Catalina Island, but the vast majority are non-radioactive chemical waste.

DDT leaking from the barrels is a much bigger problem than nuclear waste and shows up in the local sea lion population.

Anyway, there's nothing realistic that we can do about it since any attempt to retrieve the barrels will likely make things worse.

"Pot, kettle, luminosity-challenged" would be mine.

On the plus side, it has created a shooting location for every future scene set in Starfleet Command ever.

In particular, the guy running the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which produced the figures, is a recent Trump appointee who was in the Council of Economic Advisers in both Trump's first and second terms. So you can bet the stats they're publishing say exactly what Trump has told them to say.

So is the EFF the People's Front of Judea, the Judean People's Front, the Judean People's Popular Front, or the Popular Front of Judea in this story?

"If we don't immanentize Roko's Basilisk, someone else will".

That's because digging copper out of the ground is resource-intensive whether it's ore or cable. For the latter you're not digging it out of solid rock, but you are digging it out of city or residential streets that you have to restore to their original state once you've recovered your $20 worth of copper.

Shouldn't the headline say "Anthropic's Claude Fable 5.1 and Mythos 5.1 Have Landed â" And They're Load-bearing".

At the risk of starting a huge digression, it's an inherent property of FPTP electoral systems which inevitably lead to two-party systems, you end up with two vaguely-similar parties swapping control every one or two election cycles and everyone else excluded, something I once saw described as "sleepwalking to victory". A number of former British colonies who inherited it abandoned it for proportional representation which broke the power of the two parties while still managing to not go full Italy with it. I can't see this ever happening in the US, the two parties may not like each other much but one thing they both agree on is that a system that gives them an equal go at the feeding trough is great (for them, not for the country).

Ah, good point, hadn't thought of it that way.

How could the other person have been worse? At the time of the election you could be (sort-of) forgiven for thinking you were taking the lesser-of-two-evils approach, but now that he's two years into destroying the US how can anyone still think the other person would have been worse?

Saw some opinion poll figure the other day that said that as many as one in six people who voted for Trump regretted it.

Not 100% of people who voted for him, not even 50:50, but around 15%. So 85% of those who voted for him are quite happy with his performance.

Voters are beyond stupid, they're morons.