Comment Foccused ultrasound but yes. (Score 1) 37
microwave labotomy
Another poster mentioned that it's actually focussed ultrasound.
Still sounds like breaking a piece of a system by stirring the brain with a knife (lobotomy) or burning it out with heat (cauterization), electricity (electroshock) or mechanical shock (blow to the head) - just carefully focused without (substantial) damage to other parts of the brain or its casing.
Ultrasonic destruction of a piece of the brain's reward/punishment/desire/avoidance mechanism rather than persistent unwanted fat.
Comment Re:Did the manager pushing the AI loose his job? (Score 2) 94
"the manager" lol you sound like you work at a gas station
Comment Re:Before someone says it (Score 1) 134
True, misinformation coming from "trusted" sources is much more damaging than some idiot with a blog posting nonsense, simply by the fact that it's framed as something trusted by so many others.
False dichotomy. Nobody here is talking about an idiot with a blog posting nonsense.
False information coming from sources that "look" trustable but are actually not are very damaging - on purpose, as that is literally the intent.
Incomplete/biased information from trustable sources that are not deliberately attempting to mislead (as in sources that adhere to the ethics of not presenting information that is factually false, even if the picture is not "complete" as you suggest) is a slight wrong, and has existed since the dawn of the printed word - it's editorial in nature - but its effects on creating social problems pales in comparison to weaponized disinformation campaigns.
Hand-wringing about the later as if it's some kind of new thing, or something most people don't know about strikes me as super naive. The insidiousness of the former is simply that people don't appreciate the scale to which it's happening.
Comment Re:Before someone says it (Score 5, Insightful) 134
No, but treating two wrongs as the same degree of wrongness is pretty dumb.
Comment Re:Before someone says it (Score 1) 134
Or just shit like this: https://www.wsj.com/business/m...
Comment Re:This Is Why I Ditched Ubuntu (Score 1) 58
yes yes "i'm old and cranky"
Comment Re:I smell a contradiction (Score 1) 81
Or more like "cloud infrastructure running within physical and legal jurisdiction of the EU is running locally to the EU" if you prefer
Comment Re:I smell a contradiction (Score 1) 81
"The only way to ensure sovereignty and control is with software running locally with NO cloud dependency."
They're not talking about personal sovereignty. Cloud infrastructure an organization owns is "running locally" to that organization.
Comment Re:Did they really increase? (Score 1) 84
that particular amendment was voted down, bozo - the system works, no hand wringing required
doesn't mean hate speech doesn't exist
Comment Re: solid state (Score 0) 294
I'm pretty sure corporations are worse for the environment than people.
You're confident in suggesting that corporations don't cater to the demand of the market, the customers of whom seems to be waiting for the heads of those corporations to take the bus before they can be bothered to stop pissing in their own pools?
Tragedy of the commons to a tee.
Comment Re: solid state (Score 0) 294
I don't disagree with your first point.
I don't admire billionaires at all. I don't think they should exist. Wealth disparity is unchecked.
But that doesn't prevent me from operating within my own set of principles rather than in a sort of "you first" manner, which strikes me as quite child-like.
Comment Re: solid state (Score 0) 294
If every wealthy person on earth did the right thing, our environment would still be fucked, because they're vastly outnumbered by non-wealthy people.
So you're stuck on a sinking boat with a rich person, and you refuse to plug a hole until he or she plugs a hole.
The funny thing, by the time you smugly drown, they've already left the boat on a helicopter. The wealthy *be definition* will not feel the effects of worsening climate. You (and your kids) will.
I think it'd be far more intellectually honest to admit you just don't care. Nothing wrong with that, per se. It's a hell of a lot more logically defendable than your stated position.
Comment Valleygirl accent (Score 1) 40
Comment Re:I want to see inexpensive plugin hybrids but .. (Score 1) 135
You might want to read up on how current hybrid vehicles actually work, 'cause it seems you have more than one misconception going on.
I have. For instance, my latest vehicle is the Ford F-159 XLT,, the full-hybrid model of the F-series pickup truck line. Power train is:
- 6 cylinder dual-turbo engine. (runs low power but approoximately doubles output when a lot is needed.)
- 47 HP motor-generator "pancake" on the engine side of the ttransmission, to scavenge / return power to./from a 1.5 kWhr lithium battery.
- 10-speed automatic transmission, working with the lithium battery;s main alternator to fine-tune match the engine/mogen to the current driving situation. Max power of engine plus hybrid mogen; 430 hp.
- full four wheel drive.
So it's primarily a gas-engine power train with an electric-car motor mechanically coupled to the engine shaft. Many other hybrids, from the venerable prius onward, are similar, with plug-in variants having a big scavaging/peaking battery good for pure electric operation of tens of miles rather than a minute or so and a wall-powered charger added.
What I'm looking for is essentially a pure electric - totally electronic "transmission" consisting of alternator(s) between the batteries and the motor(s), plus a tiny engine-generator able to burn gas and feed some teens of KW of charging power into the batteries when running down the road or parked near it.