Comment Re:A little off-topic (Score 1) 12
Thanks for typing that out. Note that your answer can't be right, though.
Thanks for typing that out. Note that your answer can't be right, though.
Thank you for this comment. I learned a lot.
It doesn't, they just turned AI on it for the first time.
I.e. "It does."
Iâ(TM)m aware of long-lived companies who got advised to: sell off then lease back their real estate, reduce cash on hand myriad ways, changing buying habits (so inventory value on the books plunges), etc. Literally, theyâ(TM)ve been coached to eliminate every bit of those decades of reserves.
When a bad thing happens, the company dies.
The use-case for Concorde on trans-Atlantic passage was cemented for me when my uncle explained that every time he flew from NYC to London to talk to investors about his company, the stock price went up far more than the cost of his trip on the Concorde, and he could be back in time to sleep in his own bed the same day.
Seems like a no-brainer to me. I'm pretty sure (as others have pointed out) that if it weren't for the Continental-caused accident, the Concorde would likely have flown an additional decade.
Looking at current travel, there is enough demand to pack planes on BOS/NYC-SFO, SFO-HND, etc. routes that I'm sure there's enough business money to pay for supersonic service.
Remember kids, when you want to understand at a very basic level what an act does, take the name and turn it to its opposite. The Clarity Act is -- without knowing anything else -- much more likely to be about leagalizing obfuscation than any else.
Distributed power means having 2-3 orders of magnitude more power sources than with centralized systems. That increases the likelihood of an accident by the same factor.
In the US, we have already had near-disaster level nuclear accidents with about 100 total plants. Let's be generous and say that only one was really bad, TMI. That's a 1% failure rate where "failure" means the potential for disaster-level accident. If you want to remind yourself of what disaster-level accidents look like, recall what happened in Ukraine at the Chernobyl power plant, which was caused by human error. And recall that TMI was also caused by human error.
With 2-3 orders of magnitude more nuclear plants at 1% failure rate, that means 100-1000 nuclear disasters in the US, unless, somehow, we are able to engineer plants that are 2-3 orders of magnitude safer, and can find operators that make 2-3 orders of magnitude fewer bone-headed mistakes. As an engineer, albeit a non-nuclear one, I find that a daunting challenge. Yes, we as a society are capable of manufacturing at six and seven nines, but that's when we have lots and lots and lots of practice making things. Right now, nuclear plants only have two nines, with most of the relevant design and construction experience aged out. There aren't enough power plants to be made to develop that expertise, and we'll have plenty of disasters along the way as we learn, where disasters have centuries-long consequences.
So distributed nuclear power? No. Frelling. Thank. You.
cootys rat semen
Exactly. Just because a design is new with shiny gadgets does not mean it is automatically better than what has been previously on sale.
The sooner the newer generations understand this idea is nothing more than pure marketing hype, the sooner we can break away from and reject the enshittification.
"My Bluetooth isn't paring with the device I'm trying to denotate..."
Denotating it is exactly what the Bluetooth name does. *Detonating* it, on the other hand...
You realize that's the point, right?
Yours is a far more eloquent way of saying what I had intended to: why is this on Slashdot? Is there any relevance at all? I fail to see it.
If these athletes were coached by AI, well... maybe, but that's a stretch. But they're not; they are just taking more extreme measures to performance enhancement than other athletes. And while I know (and employ) some smart jocks, I had the same experience as you in secondary school, because I, too, was not a jock.
I seem to have had a very similar progression. I still tend to think in "/." replacement operators, but it's been perhaps 15 years since I've really used Wolfram Language.
Since when is it supposed to be a relative ranking? Whether or not you learned and understood the material has nothing to do with anyone else in the class.
Only recently has it been anything other than relative ranking.
Do you really say "lol"?
A method of solution is perfect if we can forsee from the start, and even prove, that following that method we shall attain our aim. -- Leibnitz