There are myriad animals whose diet depends on mosquitos, many of which are threatened or endangered. I'm no biologist, but I would think that taking measures to preserve those species and their habitat would be the best way to control mosquito populations. Wiping out the base of the food chain, while beneficial to humans in the short term, is not something to be taken lightly.

Now is a time when I really wish the EPA hadn't been gutted, so I could have confidence that proper scientists were being consulted.

I would love to have my network constantly pegged

It's been many years since I've worked at a place that uses mainframe computing, and I really have not kept up with the current state of affairs in the mainframe world. However, speaking as somebody who had posters of the Cray Y-MP and Thinking Machines CM on my childhood walls, it makes me feel cozy knowing that somebody is still making those giant machines. Now if only IBM would make a model that has a padded seat built into it ...

I can't believe all the comments from people making it sound like they are being mowed down by kids on e-bikes on a daily basis. I live in Oakland (same place the bill's author is from), and have never seen a problem. The biggest issue I've had with e-bikes is that I feel bitter when they pass my out-of-shape ass as I struggle up a hill.

Where I live is incredibly hilly. Unless you are an Iron(wo)man, you can't run errands on a regular bike. I think it is awesome that regular people use e-bikes around here to get groceries and take their kids to school. I'd hate to see that trend falter because it is too much friction to get a proper license.

It depends on what you are hauling. My friend who drives refrigerated loads said that standard practice is to have 2 drivers in the truck, and you never stop except to fuel. For those routes I'm not sure they would be happy with the need to charge for 30 minutes every 300 miles.

Just as all phones are standardizing on using electromagnetic fields for charging. I can already picture it: a dongle you put in your car's wireless charging compartment, with a wire running out plugged into your phone that's bouncing around your floor.

Wait, so now the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" crowd is claiming that LLMs kill people?

I personally do think that the AI companies should put safeguards in place to stop their products from giving out harmful advice. That said, I don't see how this AG can argue that they are criminally liable while the gun manufacturers are not.

I agree. I don't care if you have a datacenter or a widget factory, if you are disrupting the electrical grid or polluting rivers you are a problem. Instead of legislating a specific industry, they need to put broader environmental laws in place. That way if somebody wants to make a green datacenter they can, and when the next environmental nightmare fad comes along no new legislation is needed.

My wife is an emergency physician, so I have seen how Abridge tends to be used.

Previously, doctors would come home after a 12 hour shift and have to write notes on dozens of patients. Even if the care they provided was perfectly suitable, it was easy to forget to document certain things because they were tired and all the patients start to blend together. This could lead doctors who saw the patient later being confused as to why certain decisions were made.

Now they have a little device that listens to their conversations, and pre-populates parts of their notes. The AI is not making any medical decisions, and the doctors still have to read through the entire note to fill in details before they submit it.

I am not much of a proponent of AI in general, but I'd have no problem with my doctors using this. Nevertheless, in her hospital they have been all been instructed to ask the patient for permission when they walk in the room (the same way they ask if a medical student can observe the interaction). A small minority say no, and the doctor turns the device off and does the note old style for that patient (which is really not that big a deal). I'd be very surprised if Sutter didn't similarly instruct their doctors, but I assume that some people got cavalier and forgot to ask.

I'm not easily swayed by the idea that digital means better. I like physical books, and a lack of distractions. However, I do think there is merit to using computers in the classroom.

I have a son who has dyslexia and ADHD. If he went to school in my day, he would just be labeled as a bad student and would be in remedial English. Instead, his teachers recognize that the quality of his ideas (and even his reading comprehension) have nothing to do with his inability to spell or write by hand. He's given an allowance to write everything with a computer and spellcheck, and his disability doesn't really effect his schoolwork at all.

Of course it is hard for a kid with ADHD to concentrate when he has a computer and the internet at his desk all the time. But guess what, he's going to have a computer at his desk all through college and probably at his job as well. He used to have a lot of trouble staying focussed, but now he doesn't get distracted as easily. This is because part of what he is learning at school is how to get his work done, even when the internet is at his fingertips.

Sure it's bad, but not like you are saying. They are not getting any latex in their samples (and they probably checked that from the beginning). They are saying that the powder that keeps the gloves from sticking together, which is not plastic and they knew was not plastic, can register as plastic in some of their machines.

The article said the couple are considering having another baby, but when they are ready to stop the mother will have the transplant womb removed. She only needs to take the drugs for as long as they are planning on having children.

The article says:

• The company has since said it has reversed the transactions...
• Lawmakers are calling for tighter laws. Local financial-market regulators say the gaffe has exposed fundamental weakness in the countrys digital-asset industry...
• South Koreas financial regulators said they had opened a formal investigation...
• Cryptocurrency exchanges, by local law...

For years you have been waxing poetic about how crypto doesn't have middle-men and is free of government oversight. Bitcoin is as tightly regulated as fiat and everybody acquires via a middle-man, after which point it is easily tracked.

In 2025 Bitcoin is estimated to have been responsible for 211 terawatt-hours of energy use (similar to that used by all of Thailand). Why exactly are we doing this? Is there a single upside to using Bitcoin over regular fiat?

Last summer 3 teenagers burned to death in a Cybertruck near where I live. They were just home from college, borrowing their parents' Tesla, and probably didn't know where the manual override latch was.

A lot of safety is sacrificed for very little to no upside.

I would imagine it is because the passwords were stored as one-way hashes, and they use a 3rd party payment processor for financial transactions.