Sounds just like a human. Maybe AI has achieved human-level intelligence already (WARNING: Piles of advertising)

Except it isn't enough for the difference to be visible: someone has to notice it and realize it's important. Your example makes the difference obvious, but it seems clear that, in the actual criminal case, the two user names were never shown adjacent to each other, because it never occurred to anyone that the number of underscores might be important. Most people are actually very good at not noticing details like that: consider the number of typographical errors and misused words on Slashdot. The mistakes are obviously wrong, whereas two underscores isn't even obviously wrong.

It's more difficult then it might seem.

Quoting the late, great, Supreme Court of the US Justice Antonin Scalia commenting on an actual, real-life death penalty case:

Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herrera_v._Collins:

Never mind the facts of the case, as long as the court followed all the rules, if the prisoner was declared to be guilty, merely being actually innocent is not relevant.

There's already a solution for that: "Red seaweeds from the Asparagopsis genus, which contain the compound bromoform, have been shown to reduce methane production in cattle by up to 97% when they make up around 1% of a cow’s diet."

Also, most of the methane comes from the other end: cows belching gas from their stomachs. And some people have proposed really radical ideas like reducing the number of cows. Not that anyone seriously thinks that will ever catch on.

Is this the plot of the next James Bond movie? Or would it be Austin Powers? Has anyone blamed Anthony Fauci for it yet?

From the paper: "Accumulating evidence suggests that modifiable environmental exposures may contribute to the development of PD, thereby representing potential targets for prevention. This includes fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 [microns] or less (PM2.5) air pollution, which has been found to modestly increase the PD risk. More recently, environmental noise has been proposed as a potential risk factor for PD."

Seems likely. Someone should look into that.

I strongly suspect these long tirades in the style of rsilvergun and ending with "www.fark.com/politics" are generated by some sort of LLM. Whether bots are used to moderate, I don't know. I don't have any position on that.

Is it possible that he gave the farm to the city? Sorry. I apologize in advance, but certain linguistic neologistic cliches just irritate me.

"Old roots: The verb 'to gift' first appeared in the 1500s [yeah, well, what did they know? They didn't even have dictionaries] and was used in legal or formal settings. Modern return: Popularity grew again in the late 20th century, helped by media and marketing.

Yeah, see, there it is: marketing just frankly pisses me off. It also leads to abominations like "our new black pant". Singular.

Very good point. By all means, let's create a natural experiment with young children as the unwitting and unconsenting subjects.

Really? A multitude? I've completely missed that somehow. Google AI says, "Harvard economist Edward Glaeser and historian Ben Wilson both famously describe cities as humankind's greatest invention. Glaeser uses the phrase as the core premise of his book Triumph of the City, while Wilson used it as the subtitle for his historical work Metropolis," but two people wouldn't seem to be a "multitude", and I honestly don't know whether either of them ever said anyone should be "forced" to live in a city.

Some environmentalists might have promoted cities as more efficient somehow, I suppose. Commuting between suburbs and cities would seem to contribute to air pollution and various other ills, including traffic jams.

Such a sweeping claim seems to need some evidentiary support.

No, they do. In the Results section of the abstract, "Having a difference between noise at the most and least exposed facades ([Greek letter delta]noise, indicator of having a quiet side) of 10 dB or more was associated with a decline in PD risk across different levels of LDEN-Max above 50 dB." Elsewhere: "[delta]noise indicates the difference in noise level between the most and least exposed facades for each residence." And "Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cohort study show that long-term exposure to road traffic noise was associated with higher PD risk. Having a quiet facade mitigated this association." Also look at Figure 2, especially 2D.

I've only done a quick once-over of this paper, but there are several things that confuse me: one is the exposure-response in Figure 1A, which shows an increase in PD risk with increasing noise -- but only up to about 57 or 62 dB (depending on delta-noise), after which the effect decreases. This is partially explained in Figure 2, which shows that if maximum noise is about 60 dB, the risk of PD decreases with increasing difference between maximum and minimum noise. But Figure 2A seems to say that if max noise is below 50 dB, increasing delta-noise first slightly reduces, then increases, then reduces risk. The authors do say that noise below 50 dB has no effect, so this graph may represent, so to speak, noise in the noise data.

I'm also somewhat confused about housing conditions in Denmark. This paper compares the noisiest "facade" of a residence with the quietest "facade". That might make sense in an apartment building, where people would live on one side or the other, but it seems peculiar in a single-family dwelling, where presumably people spend time in different parts of the house at different times during the day and night. Sleeping in a bedroom on the noisiest or quietest side might make a difference, but that isn't mentioned.

It also seems that how much time people spend at home would make a difference. Some people would be at home most of the time, some would be out of the house during most of the day and sleeping at home, and some might be away from home for extended periods. Surely that would affect their exposure to whatever conditions obtain at home, but I don't see any mention of that contributing factor.

One could even get really philosophical and question whether decibels is the correct measurement scale. dB is logarithmic and intended to represent the perceived loudness of sound, but physiological or neurological effects might depend more on sound power levels. Maybe.

As useless as ... posting on Slashdot?

Maybe, maybe not. The Kyiv Post, "Ukraine's Global Voice", presumably not a Russian propaganda outlet, says, "Russia's Su-57 Fifth-Generation Fighter Jet Crashes Near Moscow. In brief: A Russian Su-57 fifth-generation fighter jet crashed during a training flight near Moscow. The pilot ejected, no casualties were reported, and the Russian authorities have not disclosed the cause of the incident."

The story is in English but with photo captions in Russian for some odd reason. (It's possible my browser is translating it stealthily.) No mention that Ukraine might have had anything to do with the crash. "The cause of the crash has not yet been disclosed by Russian authorities." Well, it probably wouldn't be.

Defence blog says much the same thing. Most actual news sites just say the aircraft "crashed", with some less-mainstream sites saying "friendly fire".

United 24 Media (which claims to be Ukrainian) saysr "Ukraine May Have Manipulated Russian Air Defenses Into Downing Their Own Su-57 Near Moscow". That phrase "may have" gets a lot of use, doesn't it? The theory is that a combined human and cyber intelligence attack caused Moscow's air defence to attack the aircraft. United 24 cites a Telegram account called "Inform Napalm", which is in Russian. Personally, I don't consider that a definitive source, but I can wait to see how this turns out.

That's misleading. The Defense Post: "European security officials warned in the Financial Times that two Russian space vehicles may have intercepted the unencrypted communications of at least a dozen key satellites over the continent."

First, note the phrase "may have". But more to the point, it isn't just the EU and Russia: "For years, parts of the satellite ecosystem have operated with weak or outdated security .... A team from the University of Maryland and UC San Diego spent three years studying satellite communications using a receiver system costing around $800. With off-the-shelf equipment placed on a rooftop, they were able to capture a range of satellite transmissions, from T-Mobile users’ calls and texts to exchanges shared between the US and Mexican military and law enforcement."

Meanwhile, "EU now has its own ‘secure and encrypted’ satellite communication system, Kubilius says": "European Union member states now have access to European-made 'secure and encrypted' satellite communication, the bloc’s Commissioner for Defence and Space announced on Tuesday.

"'Last week we started GOVSATCOM operations,' Andrius Kubilius said from the European Space Conference on Tuesday, referring to the European Union Governmental Satellite Communications programme. 'That means all member states can now have access to sovereign satellite communication. Military and government. Secure and encrypted. Built in Europe, operated in Europe, under European control.'"

To be followed by another, even more secure, generation of communication satellites: "He described it [GOVSATCOM] as the 'first step in satellite connectivity'. Expanded coverage and bandwidth set for 2027, while the operationalisation of the Infrastructure for Resilience, Interconnectivity and Security by Satellite (IRIS2), a multi-orbital constellation of 290 satellites, is now expected in 2029 instead of 2030."

That's odd: the article linked in the summary says, "Once in place by mid-2027, the minivan-sized spacecraft will use its 10-foot (3-meter) arms to attach a jetpack to an aging communication satellite. Then it will zip off to two more satellites in need."

Has it been corrected? It doesn't say. Or did copy and paste fail in some implausible fashion?

Totally off-topic, obviously, but this news also seems to exist solely on X and Facebook, Like this from "John McAfree". Probably fabricated fake news.