Neither is Elordi
*glances at Enron
Actually, that sounds truly brilliant. Let's raise the legal requirements so that happens...
I'd prefer if it applied to people who drive below the speed limit, brake at green lights, or who brake going down small hills. That, and those who drive Subarus or Buicks.
You want Iran to have nukes to spite Trump.
I want Irant to have nukes to piss off Israel.
We are not the same.
According to psychologist Carroll Izard, feelings are best understood as the conscious experience of emotion, arising when an affective state reaches awareness.[4] William James similarly proposed that feelings result from the perception of bodily changes in response to external stimuli, thus forming part of the emotional process.[5] More recently, affective neuroscientist Jaak Panksepp hypothesized the role of subcortical brain systems in generating core affects that underlie both feelings and emotions.[6]
In other words, a feeling is a reaction to an external stimuli. Since reactions are nothing but the neural connections in our brains responding to the external stimuli, there is little reason to say an AI, with its digital connections, can't respond to external stimuli in a similar fashion.
Bcause your sister couldn't be bothered to write things down, this is MS' fault?
VeraCrypt is a particularly strong full-disk encryption, although you don't hear much of companies using it. However, BitLocker security issues keep getting mentioned and it looks like VeraCrypt fixed a number of theirs. However, code quality seems to be listed as unclear on some sites. Not sure how true that actually is though.
BestCrypt is another, but I'm not happy they permit fragile encryption schemes, as those could potentially be used by the software as standard for something important. Being commercial software, that wouldn't be easy to check.
BitLocker seems to be a typical Microsoft failure in terms of what it does, used only because it's Microsoft and that gives CTOs and CFOs someone to blame.
Nuclear reactors use most surface water, not ground water.
Datacentres are no pickier. You can even cool a datacentre with saltwater, you just need a heat exchanger.
Also, closed loop does not evaporate. The loop is not closed if stuff escapes from it.
You're arguing with the actual terminology used in the nuclear industry. "Closed loop" or "closed cycle" designs have the water pumped in a cycle through cooling towers. The towers lose water to evaporation, taking heat with them, but the rest of the water is returned to be reheated again. "Open loop" or "open cycle" designs have no cooling towers. The water is heated and just discharged hot. They consume much more water (over an order of magnitude more), but most of that is returned. Closed loop are more common, but you see open loop in some older designs, and in seawater-cooled reactors.
"How often do you think I print?"
Seemingly not very.
I've printed many hundreds of kg on my P1S, thanks.
I do not consider having to write data out to a card and transport it back and forth between the printer and the computer to be the pinnacle of convenience. That's something that would be considered embarrassingly inconvenient for a 1980s printer, let alone a modern net-connected device. And it's designed to be inconvenient for non-cloud prints for a reason.
I personally pronounce giraffe with a soft G. So it would be geraff and not jiraff.
Don't hate the player.
Also, anything sounds big when you put it in gallons. Doesn't sound so big when you mention that's 92 acre feet, the amount used by less than 20 acres / 8 hectares of alfalfa per year. Or when you mention that a typical *closed loop* 1GW nuclear reactor uses 6-20 billion gallons of cooling water per year (once-through uses 200-500 billion gallons, though most of that is returned, whereas closed loop evaporates it)
"Being against torture ought to be sort of a multipartisan thing." -- Karl Lehenbauer, as amended by Jeff Daiell, a Libertarian