Comment Déjà vu, All over again (Score 5, Interesting) 59
I remember a time when any stupid idea that you could put ".com" on would get shit tons of investor money. The only thing it produced mostly was bankruptcies and the opportunity for small companies to buy needed equipment for pennies on the dollar. This AI craziness strikes me the same way. AI can be useful but it'll never be the "be all things", they rarely to live up to the hype. I've seen it too many times, the dotcom boom-bust, nano-technology, Ruby on rails; anyway COBOL had a good run.
Comment Re:Why does US care what EU censors? (Score -1) 169
Comment Re:Why does US care what EU censors? (Score -1) 169
Comment Re:Reality (Score -1) 237
Comment Wikipedia is woke (Score -1) 237
Comment Re:Time to eliminate Section 230 (Score -1) 226
Comment Re:Apologise, greens (Score 1) 220
From what I'm seeing online, the Three Gorges Dam in China, looks like it might not need an earthquake or a tsunami, just some floods.
Comment Re:Apologise, greens (Score 1) 220
More often wind shuts down because the wind is blowing too hard than it is too little.
Comment Re:Exploded? From what? (Score 1) 95
What is in a commercial communications satellite that can go so badly it will explode and send 20+ chunks of debris in all directions?
I'm going with hypergolic rocket fuel for station keeping and enough lithium ion batteries to keep it powered through maximum eclipse duration of around 72 minutes, especially when either of the above is hit by a micro-meteor.
Comment Re: Power? (Score 1) 95
I'm sure the power loss was to the satellite itself, not a terrestrial power grid and the loss of power resulted in the satellite being incapable of servicing it's customers.