These suborbital hops are spaceflight as much as standing on an interstate overpass is a road trip. Yeah, you're technically there in a uselessly pedantic definition of there, but making minutes-long suborbital launches routine really doesn't do much towards making LEO or interplanetary travel routine which would actually be genuine advancement.

The 1959 classic Some Like It Hot was all about gender bending and was "woke" af.

Stringing together concepts is reasoning. Concepts have semantic meaning by definition. To the LLM, the words are just tokens, which are statistically associated with other tokens. LLMs do not have any concept of the semantics behind those tokens, which we as thinking humans recognize as words.

And all the technical reasons why Linux is a better desktop OS than Windows or Mac are valid too. Doesn't change the fact that technical superiority alone is insufficient to drive adoption of a technology.

You might think DSL speeds are sufficient for Grandma who from your observations of her usage patterns just appears to need the ability to check email and do online crosswords. Until one day you email her a link to a video you took of her grandkids, and she is distraught with all this modern newfangled technology leaving her unable to view the video you sent her and she as no idea why.

Presumptions that someone should be satisfied with significantly less than the state of the art only lead to disappointment.

Correction, he is loyal to exactly one person, himself. Every single thing he does, he does in furtherance of his own ego. He only ever saw the presidency as the biggest prize to win, and January 6th happened because he was incapable of comprehending a reality in which he didn't win.

Itâ(TM)s more a factor of what the companies are doing with their rockets than the capabilities of the engines. SpaceX is working on developing Starship, which due to its crazy scale has its own issues that make development not fast. And Blue Origin seems incapable of going to orbit regardless of their engine technology. If SpaceX wanted to be first to orbit with a methalox engine, they could have retrofitted the Raptor to the Falcon 9. But F9 is working just fine as it is, and that just wasnâ(TM)t a priority for them.

Except that we have to take into account larger economic and societal externalities as well, which you can't get simply by looking at this particular salt flat as a lithium mine in potentia. Clearly, there is a very large economic benefit to having a satellite calibration site, and by devoting the salt flat to that purpose rather than a lithium mine, society benefits even if a particular lithium extraction company doesn't.

Yes, he likely lied to himself. He probably Dunning-Kruger'd himself into believing that meticulous adherence to checklists was a suitable replacement for rigorous safety protocols designed by actual safety experts, and therefore had full faith in his carbon-fiber tin can.

Speaking of 18th century vs, 21st, it is incredible that in 2023, slashdotâ(TM)s Unicode rendering is still broken.

Also, the abortion issue is 100% about the body autonomy of the mother. Hereâ(TM)s why.

Imagine that somebody has a rare kidney disease, and if they donâ(TM)t get a kidney transplant they will die. Due to circumstances, you are the only person on the planet who is a donor match. You have to give up one of your kidneys (a perfectly safe operation that will leave you just fine and healthy) in order for this person to live. The law does not allow you to be forced to give up that kidney. You are perfectly allowed to refuse even though doing so would result in that personâ(TM)s death. Why? Because you have body autonomy.

However, in states with restrictive abortion laws, a fetus has more rights than that kidney patient, because a woman can be forced to sacrifice her bodyâ(TM)s integrity to preserve the life of another. And if you donâ(TM)t believe that carrying a pregnancy to term is sacrificing your body, then you have never been pregnant, or have never listened to someone who has been.

Originalism is the absolute stupidest take on the constitution that is possible for a person to have. We do not live in the 18th century. The realities of our 21st century society are very different than those of the 18th century. The knowledge we have about how the universe works in the 21st century is much greater than it was in the 18th century. Likewise, how society is run in the 21st century must be adapted to the knowledge and realities that we have in the 21st century. The 9th amendment to the Constitution exists for a reason.

As it pertains to rights, the majority opinion from Obergefell v. Hodges put it best:

âoeThe nature of injustice is that we may not always see it in our own times. The generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not presume to know the extent of freedom in all of its dimensions, and so they entrusted to future generations a charter protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we learn its meaning. When new insight reveals discord between the Constitutionâ(TM)s central protections and a received legal stricture, a claim to liberty must be addressed.âoe

They have never been the first to market in any product category since the beginning of the company. PCs were already a very well established category when the Macintosh was introduced, and IBM and others had already brought various microcomputers to market when the Apple 1 was created.

Being second to market with a more refined product has served them well for decades.

So it turns out when you give people a load of financial power and zero regulatory oversight, they do stupid shit. Who possibly could have seen this coming?

Here you go. Looks like it has some bounce, but still needs some work. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...