I have mixed feelings about the team behind the AI that called itself MechaHitler getting tons of taxpayer money

All of the large AI platforms have similar issues.

xAI is the only one opening admitting it happens and trying to resolve it.

So I'd rather give my money to them then a company pretending the well they are drawing training data from is not poisoned.

C++ is also largely changed by a committee. Honestly, the best thing that's happened to C++ in its whole lifetime is that the committee started ripping features off from other languages.

Gone are the days where a language can be designed, written and MAINTAINED by a single person. I don't know why we'd even want that, to be honest. Committees are fine as long as they get the job done.

You are about 8 billion cycles behind on news it seems like, this story should clue you in as to how far off you are.

Yes I have heard of Warp Speed, and fully believe it was the reason the vaccine was developed so quickly.

Are you really so dense that you believe complete rubbish that has been quoted to you?

YOU should probably try reading the summary, they were not here legally, but were given forbearance because of supposed hardships where they came from - but no one really vetted the claims they made. They could still apply for legal immigration.

It might limit range anxiety but at a price of $112k all it will do is replace it with financial anxiety. You'll feel comfortable about making it to the next charging station but not about making the next month's car payment.

Sorry I guess I'm going to have to ask a more specific question. Do you have an example of anybody owning a few million $ in bitcoin *exchanging ALL of it* for something that is not Bitcoin or another cryptocurrency or crypto asset. The fact that you can exchange a small amount of bitcoin for the equivalent amount of dollars does not prove anything.

There are examples of people exchanging their entire hold of hundreds of millions in gold or stocks, without the value of those commodities crashing. Would like proof this is the same for bitcoin.

To me Bitcoin long term is still kind of iffy, but if you want something ELSE to help you escape the traditional monetary system, there is gold and silver which are also up quite a but for the year, even the past year, and moving higher.

You can also get crypto backed by gold or silver as well if you want an electronic form. Just make sure you get a form actually backed by real metals in vaults.

Do you have ANY examples of somebody exchanging more than about 1 bitcoin for anything other than other cryptocurrency?

With a wild twisting of words this author added "meaning the emissions were dumped up-front in China's coal plants" to try to make this sound bad.

ALL "manufacturing emissions" are "dumped up-front". There is not something special about China or using coal. And even with the 2x or more CO2 emissions of coal, a solar power panel replaces all that CO2 emission in just a few months, which is an awful lot better than a lot of other things that people claim are green.

Probably but the question you want to ask is which produces the fewest wrong decisions: making their own decisions vs. missing the AI's mistakes?

Probably because while we all agree that society should be "fair" we all have very different ideas of what "fair" means hence there is a need to discuss it. For example, if we take the extremes, the "equity-based" worldview defines fairness as equal outcomes regardless of situation or choices while the "equality-based" worldview takes fairness as treating everyone the same and leaves the outcomes entirely up to chance and the individual. I suspect/hope that despite the recent polarization of politics most of us are still on a spectrum between those two extremes hence the need to discuss what we collectively view as "fair".

No, that would be using the kinetic energy perspective to temperature not the more usual statitical mechanics mechanics approach. However, even then there is no upper bound on kinetic energy since, in the relativistic regime it becomes (gamma*mc^2 - mc^2) where gamma = 1/sqrt(1-v^2/v^2) so as v tends to c (the speed of light in vacuo) gamma become infinite so there is no known upper bound.

The formula for KE you give only applies to Newtonian mechanics. As you aproach the speed of light you find that space and time do not behanve the same and so you definition of velocity has to change to make any sense. The result is that relativistic kinetic energy has the formulaL
KE = gamma*mc^2 - mc^2
where m is the mass, c the speed of light and gamma=1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) where v is your classical newtonian velocity. Hence as v tends towards c, gamma tends to infiinity and so there is no known upper bound on kinetic energy.

If you have any doubts about this then just remember that the LHC accelerates protons to 7 TeV. If your classical formula held it would be impossible to accelerate them to an energy greater than about 500 MeV, i.e. we have exceeded that limit by a factor of 14,000.

Hardly. The US was definitely gaining rapidly before WW2 but Europe, and particularly the British Empire, was still very much the world's superpower. WW2 ended the empire and caused massive damage throughout Europe allowing the US to take the lead.

Regardless of that though science is a global endeavour and the knowledge gained benefits all of humanity. None of us will be better off if the US science program is diminished because it will mean less science is being done.