Good for the MAGA morons, because they can claim "unemployment is down".

Not necessarily. While that is absolutely what the administration will do, and is doing, for a lot of the "angry boomer" set, they will be feeling this on the ground and in their community, and it can lead to one of the cardinal rules of politicking being violated;- "Dont tell the punters that the thing they are experience isnt what they are experiencing". When politicans say "The economy is great, look at this GDP!" but people are feeling like everything is more expensive, their kids cant find jobs, their own job is becoming more insecure, and the rent or mortgage payments keeps going up, then people just get angry and feel like they are being lied to and betrayed, and its that sense of being lied to and betrayed that lead to so many people going "Well this trump guys kind of an asshole, but at least he's honest".

Now, you and I know that "Honest" is literally the opposite of what trump is, but when Trump was out there campaigning that washington technocrats where letting people down, well he wasnt wrong. The institutional Dems and Republicans where very happy to stick with a status quo that had been getting worse and worse for average people ever since the sub prime mortgage crisis. Obama promised hope and change, but other than a marginally better health care system, not much changed. Biden seemed content to just try and fix some, but not all, of Trumps damage from his first term. People where angry, because the technocrats where telling them that "Everythings fine, America is America-ing, everything in its place" , meanwhile jobs where still fleeing offshore, grandma cant afford her diabetes meds, and wages where pegged while inflation ran rampant. Trump promised to fix that. Trump DIDNT fix that, and in fact made it worse, but the promise not the reality is what got him in the door.

There are lessons for Trumps opponents here, but the biggest is, the people on the fence about MAGA and the people who where marginally MAGA *can* be reached, and when the Dems get back in power, they actually need to concretely resolve the anxieties that caused Trump to get in in the first place. Because if America was working, Trump would have been impossible.

Tell us more about how you're smarter than the experts who actually did what you say they didn't do

Re-read my post. I literally work in climate research so dont go fucking argument-from-authoritying me, you wont win that fight if we have to start pulling out our credentials lol

I am straight up telling you climate scientists are always being asked to tone down findings and make them seem less dire than they are by government funding bodies. That in practice has led to a pretty cautious approach thats lead to the public not being fully aware of just how dire some of this really is. Thats not saying that scientists are *lying* and hiding the severity of climate change, but rather that when tuning models theres an bias against models that predict the more catastrophic outcomes. When I was working with the CSIRO some of the models where up with predictions that basically have us venusing the planet. We tended to not go with those, because our intuition was that if the planet *could* do that, it *would* do that. But we dont know if thats a sane assumption, so those models dont make the cut for publication.

So yeah. we could end up venusing the planet. Probably unlikely, but just so you know. My most educated guess is the full permafrost scenario isnt a complete venusing but rather a 10c rise. Which isnt particularly compatible with human life, but life finds a way. Lets hope we get a grip on things before we DO completely melt the permafrost

Technically its supposed to be the workers seizing the means of production for it to be communism. However in practice this rarely ends up whats happening.During spains brief flirtation with communism prior to getting smashed by Franco, the anarchist CNT-FAI controlled territory was doing this, and by all accounts it was a pretty great thing. But whe spanish communist party territories where just doing state control. But yeah authoritarian-marxist parties historically have not shown a great history of being particularly ... marxist.... about it all,

Also, whats happening here is more Corporatism than Communism. Its more about trying to appease dear leader than it is about sharing the wealth with the country.

Thats actually a really good point. We are far from untangling the legal mess this stuff brings. Fully AI genned code does not have copyright proection at all (My boss was a bit shocked when I pointed this out to him after he vibecoded an internal tool. I also found about 10 different serious vunerabilities in that mess after about 10 minutes of inspection lol. Hey man, this AI shit is existential threat territory for me......) and partial AI genned stuff is ...... still somewhat undefined copyright legality at this stage, because we have *no* idea how those copyright suits will pan out if one of the litigants ever decides to stick it thru. MOST of those cases get settled out of court to avoid precedent.

In this particular instance though, the Godot maintainers have been disrespectful to humans attempting to contribute for several years.

Oh nonsense. Godots a huge project with literally thousands of contributors. Theres always a handful of people who are serial garbage submitters in any large project (Ask the kernel people about this, they have a terrible time dealing with this stuff) who throw giant wobblies when their buggy nonsense gets politely declined. Theres also those contributions that arent necessarily bad quality but simply dont fit the plan.

Godot has a particular direction it goes in. If folks want to change that, theres an RFC proposal project and then it goes to the community for review. If the community, particularly the community that have to maintain it, reject it, then its not in.

Fortunately the GDExtension system means its rare that rejected code , if its major feature stuff, has to stay dead, as it can just be made into an extension and placed in the asset library.

Those godot forks dont go far. There was one over..... shit maybe it was the code of conduct or something like that. It had 4, maybe 5 conrtributors. The Godot engine it self has 34 separate teams (Ie "core", "network", "physics") each with their own leads that do pull request merging and eventual pushing shit up towards juan who fills the role of basically linus torvalds for Godot). Its a shockingly big operation these days, and yeah. There was a reasonably larger fork over technical issues but it wasnt a hostile fork, and PRs its smaller changes back to main. Pretty much how most succesful open source projects go.

But the political fork? Yeah all big projects get those, and they always die.

Those of us who practically live along the coasts

Thats why we dont ask people who dont ("practically") live on the coast. We fucking measure it.

For reference, the sea levels have rose 7 inches since the 1970s. Wont seem much if your coast is a wall. But if your on a beach thats has an angle repose of 5-6 degrees, then you just lost 15 feet of beach.

Can they factor a number larger than 21 with QC yet?

I can tell you for a fact that when I was working in Climate Science in the mid 2000s, Scientists where being heavily pressured to "tone it down" in terms of model tuning to avoid attracting the saurons-eye of conservative political lobbyists who, at the time, where busy going after the fucking weatherman with some outrageously mentally ill theory that weather stations where spookily lying about how hot it was, as if we hadn't been factoring in urban heat islands already since the frigging 1800s.

True, you aren't going to be running this at home. But then no one runs the SOTA models at home. You can GLM-5.2 on z.ai's hardware, using a subscription plan similar to the plans offered by Anthropic and OpenAI. The most notable difference is: it's 1/2 the price.

The problem with providers like z.ai is running into compliance problems and corporate paranoia. As an Australian company, the boss is paranoid enough about even letting the Americans access our cloud data let alone the Chinese who have always been shady commercially. Though to much groaning from the tech staff he's also recently discovered vibe coding so. who the f*** knows anymore.

Ah , ignore my other comment. That was attached to the wrong post :/

Yeah I've read Kuhn. Paul Feyerabend's "Against Method" is an interesting take too (he strongly leans on the chaotic nature of how real science is often done). Like yeah, I'm more just recounting the Poperian "party line" on science. However while certainly its always a lot more compicated and rooted in the cultural institutions of science and the dominant discourses on how-to-do-a-science I'd argue that when science is working *well* it is essentially a popperian enterprise, and can somewhat go off the rails when its not (see the competing madness going on at the bleeding edge of physics where thousands of physicists have put lifetimes into String theory despite the fact we have no idea if any of its even remotely true [and in fact we are starting to get some evidence its not, due to the failure of SuSy, which needs to be true for String to be true). I dont think thats a good state to be in, and a number of physicists are starting to arc up and say "Hey, this is madness. Lets go back to fundamentals, experiments, data, things we can actually reason about with proper scientific method"

I accidently attached this to the wrong comment before. Whoops. Reposting it in the right place to make it make sense.
-------------
Copenhagen, and a few things like that I'd argue are exceptions not the rule, because we honestly dont fucking know and we might not even be able to find out until we can figure out how to test for it.

The truth of the matter is the QM Interpretations aren't really science, but rather science-adjacent in the best sense of the term (maths is science-adjacent, and very much part of the conversation). Until we can find a way a way to run experiments to start ruling out interpretations or even better stiill actually confirm one, all we really have is a statement of a problem "What is the physical form of this rather central piece of math" and we have some good, but 100% speculatory, suggestions.

QM is not alone on this. String theory is very much science-adjacent because we just dont have experiments that could disprove or prove it.

As a result, yeah, debates are all we have. And boy do those debates suck.

Copenhagen, and a few things like that I'd argue are exceptions not the rule, because we honestly dont fucking know and we might not even be able to find out until we can figure out how to test for it.

The truth of the matter is the QM Interpretations aren't really science, but rather science-adjacent in the best sense of the term (maths is science-adjacent, and very much part of the conversation). Until we can find a way a way to run experiments to start ruling out interpretations or even better stiill actually confirm one, all we really have is a statement of a problem "What is the physical form of this rather central piece of math" and we have some good, but 100% speculatory, suggestions.

QM is not alone on this. String theory is very much science-adjacent because we just dont have experiments that could disprove or prove it.

As a result, yeah, debates are all we have. And boy do those debates suck.

Science does not have truths. It has theories, and all of them are incorrect at some level. Some of them are useful and supported by data. See, for example f=ma and a falling apple. If it is truth yea seek, turn to math.

No. Some truths are straight up true. The wrinkle is that we can't truly know for sure. But we can build up a consensus built from experiments and robust exchanges of data.

No, of course a broken spar is A Very Bad Thing when it happens in midair.

Is this changing-the-timing-chains-in-an-Audi difficult, or is this replacing-your-spinal-cord-without-killing-you impossible?

Are these planes repairable? I think it's a reasonable question.

(Of course, with the Audi, if has anything more than a loose gas cap it's not economically feasible to repair, but that's what you get with European engineering.)