Yes. We should all be our own FDA, EPA, and OSHA. That worked *really well* in the past.

There's no way on (or off) Jupiter's Green Earth that you could ever put a terawatt of anything in space. Every one of those watts would have to be radiated into space somehow. Can you imagine how large the heat sinks would have to be? Keep in mind that radiating heat in a vacuum is about the most inefficient way to get rid of heat that one can think of. On Earth, you can use air and water to move heat around and then dump the air or heat into the environment. In space, you only have radiation, which is basically proportional to exterior surface area and temperature. And, that exterior qualifier is important in space. Using some kind of finned radiator like we use in air or water won't work very well, since most of the heat radiated off will just be re-absorbed by other parts of the radiator. This means that in space, the most efficient (in terms of mass and heat loss) is gigantic, quite thin, highly conductive disc of metal. To distribute the heat across the entire disc, you'd probably embed a grid of heat pipes.

And, then, holy space solar panels, Batman. A terawatt is a LOT of solar panels. You could probably make the solar panels double as radiators, but that would only work if you kept them relatively cool. You're still going to also need a bunch of radiator disc. The only way I think that you get possibly get this to work is to make like a sort of triangular prism type of design. Make one side solar panels and face the sun. Make the other two sides radiators. Keep the computers in the middle, connected to the radiators through heat pipes. And then you'd need a satellite dish sticking out one end, or, preferably, both, along with a smattering of thrusters.

Considering the difficulties in dealing with the and the delay added to communications by being in space (even LEO would be bad; roughly half the time the satellites would be on the other side of the planet.), it would be much, much simpler, and cheaper, to put all of that computing power on the ground, preferably nearer to the Poles than the Equator, and preferably near a large body of water, like a lake or ocean. The Great Lakes region in the US and Canada would be great. Solar power isn't super great around The Great Lakes, but wind power is quite feasible, and the cooling potential is off the hook. I mean, there's cold water everywhere. I would think that, in Europe, the fjords of Norway and Sweden would be pretty ideal. Iceland would be pretty good too, so long as you bring in enough cross-oceanic cables from Europe and Canada. The mere fact that you wouldn't have to launch satellites into orbit along would make Iceland seem like a steal compared to space, even with the cables. Hell, even Antarctica would be cheaper and easier than space, and would have similar ping times.

Yeah. I wish that were true. Trump was elected by a majority. And his current support numbers are still around 38%.
https://www.economist.com/inte...

It turns out the number of idiots if really high. And the ones running the country and enforcing the 'laws' include a lot of 'em.

I would much rather go nearly anywhere in Europe.

From their site:
"drive up to 40 miles per day completely off the grid".

Even half that would cover all my driving needs for our 2nd car (2 person/2 car family).

Well considering that cancer is a class of diseases, rather than a disease of and in itself, meaning that one cannot "cure cancer", only cure certain kinds of cancer one at a time, I'd say we're doing pretty well, thank you very much. I mean, we basically cured most types of vaginal, cervical, and anal cancers as well as a number of oral and esophagal cancers in one shot with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

This. If I could upvoter you on this site, I'd make a stack of alts and mod you to the moon. The sooner this AI craze dies, the better. Even though I also think that quantum computing will likely remain a niche physics experiment until after I'm dead in fifty years, I support physics research wholeheartedly and desire for more of it. At least that has a hope being awesome. So far, these AIs have really only gotten good at talking people into suicide and annoying all of us mathematicians who know how it works.

Microsoft themselves actually did go after the Texas company nearly a decade ago and won. Why the government didn't prosecute them criminally as well is beyond me.

As far the the scam goes, I think people aren't wrote realizing that the CoA stickers aren't the license to use Windows. Will they activate a copy of Windows? Probably. I have no idea if Microsoft can blacklist blocks of stickers or not. I think what people are missing is that someone has to print up those stickers. This lady just bought a few rolls of those stickers under the table from the printer. But she definitely didn't buy licenses from Microsoft and I don't think, realistically, that she could have thought otherwise. Technically, when she was selling those stickers, it was a type of fraud because she didn't have the Windows licenses to sell, just the stickers, but any ordinary buyer is going to see the sticker and think they're getting a license, when they technically aren't. You don't really need to give out DVDs or other installation media anymore; anyone can get that from Microsoft's website for free.

(I would also like to point out that I think the person I'm replying to probably knows all of paragraph 2 already; I'm just making it explicit.)

But the courts have shot down that argument repeatedly now. Only humans can be a an author. Period. An AI is not a human and so can't be an author. A monkey is not a human and so can't be an author.

The courts have already addressed this and shot it down. No matter how creative the prompt is, the output of the AI is not eligible for copyright. The prompt itself may be, but only if it's actually creative and not just a rote list of descriptors. And even then, a prompt isn't all that likely to produce the same output every time. The way the LLMs currently work, there's quite a bit of randomness that go into the image generation.

Am I the only one that find "times as cheap" annoying? I really want it to be 1/3 the cost. Meh.

I'm also curious how many cycles it's good for when compared to other battery tech.

I think it may be you who is confused about units. MW are power, that is energy per time. MWh is a unit of energy. 1 MWh = 3.6 GJ.

They are doing something about it. They've shut down the government in order to force ICE to knock their terror campaign off. Individuals are reporting and monitoring ICE agents while ICE engages in their acts of domestic terrorism. They are protesting throughout the country basically continually. They do shit all the time. They aren't exactly in power right now, so what they can get done is limited. Even when they've been in power in recent years, they haven't had the numbers to get good stuff through. This is largely due to successful campaigns by Republicans to suppress the vote and to gerrymander themselves into more representation than they deserve. If the playing field were even, Republicans would never win an election again, assuming Democrats don't do anything super dumb, like having Biden run for re-election.

So stop pretending that Democrats have dropped the ball. No. Republicans took the ball and punted it into the sun and then got a bunch of M4A1s out and started threatening and even murdering everyone who points out they're cheating.

I can't think of the last time any Democrat led government had straight-up murdered people in broad daylight and lied about. Whenever bad shootings happen, Democratic prosecutors routinely attempt to prosecute the officers in question. Republicans congratulate them on their murder and try to blame the victims.

Fuck right off with this both-sides shit. When's the last time the Democrats ever advocated putting children in jail, separated from the parents, en masse, or sending thousands of secret police to terrorize and murder the citizens of cities run by republicans (no, they no longer deserve to be capitalized)? Oh, that's right: NEVER. That's because Democrats actually do care about the people and the rule of law. They aren't a crazy death cult run by a tyrannic fascist. Do they have problems? Sure. Are they on a level with the republicans' outright opposition to the Constitution, the rule of law, and of every form of justice? No, not even close. The republicans have buried themselves so deep in the evil mire that they should probably start worrying about buying fire-proof suits. If Hell exists, I'll see them burn in the deepest depths of the hottest Hells, from the Heavens, while me and Obama laugh it up somewhere out there in the Galaxy, while chatting casually with Jesus and the Buddha.

(And I don't want to hear any shit about the Democrats prior to the 1970's. Before then, the parties' loyalties were divided very differently. The parties back then are NOT the parties of today. They're related only through a shared history.)

People often misunderstand the works of Karl Marx. You, sir, understand perfectly. I mean, he was wrong about the whole Communism thing, but the idea that if the rich piss the poor off enough, the poor will rise up and kill them is pretty solid and has happened plenty of times. It's starting to happen right now again, it seems.

I mean, Jesus wasn't anything. He never existed IRL. But, setting that aside, if we look at the "teachings" of Jesus as a whole, it is a serious stretch to believe that Jesus would be a capitalist. If anything, he'd be a Socialist or a full-out Communist.
"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye than for a rich man to enter into God’s Kingdom." - Matthew 19:24
Jesus looking at him loved him, and said to him, “One thing you lack. Go, sell whatever you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me, taking up the cross.” - Mark 10:21
The list of saying goes on and on. Jesus didn't want you to hoard your money. He wanted you to support the poor. Now, in ancient times, supporting the poor was seen as a duty to be performed by rich individuals currying favor with the masses. Those individuals were effectively the government, at least in the Roman Empire, where Jesus was. Today, our governments are more centralized than in the past. The way that we, as a society, help all the poor is by having the government ensure that all people have what they need.

The particular way that has been found to most effective at doing that is a system we call Socialism. Socialism is a capitalist system, but with certain industries tightly regulated and (usually partially) funded by taxation set up to ensure that all people get all that they need. There's no chance that Jesus, given a choice between having everybody individually do good through charity alone and having everybody collectively do good through Socialism, would have chosen charity alone. He'd have picked Socialism.

This whole "He wanted individuals to choose to be good so the government can't do it for them" idea is nonsense. The government doing it IS everyone being charitable. Remember, the government IS THE PEOPLE. It is the collective will of all the people. If the government socialistically provides for the poor by taxing the shit out of the rich, then that IS the rich people being charitable. Yeah, it's not exactly by choice, but who gives a shit? The rich are still rich, even under Socialism, but at least your gardener can get his chemo when he needs it. I mean, you could still choose to be an asshole and just not be rich and pay little to no taxes, thus not being charitable. Or you could get rich AND have everyone in society be cared for. Why go for the shittiest option of being rich while everyone suffers unless you, personally, decide to be nice today? If you think that's a good world to live in, fuck your mother.