There will always be more Uyghurs to vivisect. :-(

With a few exceptions, Prime Video now seems to be all ads all the time.

That name is going to be largely useless for a while.

It's a head scratcher, isn't it. After they try him in absentia, maybe they'll imprison him in absentia and then execute him in absentia.

You don't know what you're talking about. The USPTO has granted many patents for "suspected" (ahem) perpetual motion machines. I posted a link to some examples, but here's an interesting explanation of one case by a patent attorney:

https://unmakeme.com/2022/05/0...

The secret to getting your patent granted (besides arguing a lot with the patent examiner) is to avoid claiming "over unity", even if your device would clearly provide that if it did as you described.

And, as the other poster mentioned, an actual working model would demonstrate utility nicely. The trick is coming up with one, given thermodynamics.

The USPTO could reject the patent on those grounds but doesn't have to. Just because someone receives a patent doesn't mean that the invention necessarily works. But the patent office will require a working model if the application claims that the device puts out more energy than it takes in. Don't claim that and you may get your patent.

There is even a patent category for such things:

F03B17/04 - Alleged perpetua mobilia
Perpetua mobilia of alleged kind, i.e. devices where the hydrostatic thrust effect is used to supposedly drive a device continuously, without input of energy, or of additional energy after the start, even when the concept perpetual is not explicitly mentioned.

https://patents.google.com/?q=...

The USPTO will grant you a patent on your perpetual motion invention if you submit a working model. This is why perpetual motion crackpots file patents for devices that output exactly as much energy as is input, with no loss. That doesn't require a working model, unlike "over unity" devices.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Large language models like ChatGPT manufacture plausible details according to statistical likelihoods. They have no way of recreating the redacted information.

Because the statistics come from large collections of open literature, and not actual classified documents that allegedly discuss aliens, all the newly filled-in text will do is reinforce the same preconceptions that general population already has.

Garbage in, garbage out.

With all the hype about various media bodies using ChatGPT to write articles, are we now going to see ChatGPT being trained by ChatGPT output?

What horrors will be produced by this incestuous vicious circle?

Why else would they encourage central banks to invest in shrinking digital dust?

Even if there were some value to cryptocurrencies, why would countries use an existing one, inflated by speculation, instead of creating their own?

Hey, if you buy one trillionth of a percent ownership stake in my new ***SUPERCOOLSTARTUP*** for one dollar, the market cap will hit 100 trillion dollars. The company will be worth more than the rest of the market combined!

We've just taken over the world, all for a one dollar investment. How supercool is that?

Yup, this was a vector display with no scan lines or pixels. A 1024 by 1024 pixel display requires a megabit of memory, which might have been possible in 1962 but would have required NASA or DoD level budgets to achieve.

For a vector display, you just need a couple of digital to analog converters to drive the horizontal and vertical deflection of the CRT directly. Back then, you could build those using an R-2R ladder. The DACs are driven by line generating hardware that gets its data from a "display list" of the various vectors to be displayed. The display list fits in a much smaller amount of memory than would be required for a full bitmap, and its access speed requirements are relaxed as well.

The light pen was invented for use with vector displays because it could actually pick out which vector was being displayed at any particular moment. Instead of triggering at a particular horizontal position on a particular scan line, it would trigger on the particular vector being processed by the display list. If the light pen wasn't touching a glowing vector on the screen, the light pen wouldn't trigger at all. If you wanted to be able to indicate an arbitrary place on the screen using a light pen, the software had to search for it by drawing something like expanding boxes.

Vector displays allowed high resolution graphics with real-time interactivity long before the PC era with its slow, low-resolution graphical displays. They had some neat features too. If you had too many vectors in your display list, it would just slow down the refresh rate. The image on the CRT would flicker, but it would still show everything.

Vector displays live on in laser/galvanometer setups.

I don't know about other jurisdictions, but under U.S. patent law, *all* of the inventors must be listed on the patent application for it to be valid.

If a company or university deliberately leaves a female inventor off of the patent application, and she qualifies as an inventor under USPTO definitions, then the patent can be invalidated for that reason. Leaving any actual inventor off of a patent would be a foolish thing to do.

...when Bitcoin collapses into the digital dust from which it was created?

I can certainly understand his motivation to shout at anyone who is not supporting the narrative that keeps his pile of imaginary crypto-wealth in existence.

What if California built high-speed rail over the canals and then covered that with solar panels?

And there could be community gardens and compost stations alongside, with organic cannabis vendors and special ATMs for receiving universal basic income payments.

Wouldn't that be a wonderful world? Let's all join hands and sing so that someone, somewhere will just make it happen.