It does sound ludicrous…might be better off making a concave mirror so it reflects and intensifies the light…like a giant magnifying glass over an ant hill. Yeah…that’s how they should do it. Nothing gonna wrong with that.
It does sound ludicrous…might be better off making a concave mirror so it reflects and intensifies the light…like a giant magnifying glass over an ant hill. Yeah…that’s how they should do it. Nothing gonna wrong with that.
That means someone at meta thinks the evidence that will come in trial will cost them more than $1.4b
I had to get an electrician to come run the 220 line for me because I don’t trust myself with high voltage electrical work. Bought the charger itself on Amazon for around $300. I installed that part myself. Wasn’t too hard, basically jist mounted the converter to the wall and plugged it in.
Lv 1 charges are pretty shitty…takes my car about 12 minutes to get a mile-worth of charge on a 120v. I could still make it through a week of commuting doing that, but my range was a little lower each day until the weekend when I didn’t have to commute. That being said, I ponied up for a 220v outlet in the garage, and the Lv 2 charging is much better. Takes about 15 minutes to recharge from a days-worth of driving (usually 30-40 miles between work and running the kids around to all their activities).
Probably easier than thawing the gasoline in the ice engine, which freezes at -40. And your diesel generator won’t run either unless you kept it plugged in to keep the fuel from turning to gel (that process starts at -10).
They fired 12 employees of a workforce numbering over 216,000. Looks like they fired 1000x more employees (literally…12000) last year just because “that’s business.” What a nothingburger.
A faulty sensor…A faulty senso responsibility, amirite?
Just like healthcare…there are very few cases where replacing a societal motivation with a profit motivation results in better service or lower costs.
AI isn’t giving the right misinformation
Same here. It’s good for writing your basic unit tests, and the explain feature is useful getting for getting your head wrapped around complex syntax, especially as bad as searching for useful documentation has gotten on Google and ddg.
Everyone I know who’s interested in raw milk probably has a few crates of ivermectin left over from the pandemic…should be plenty to keep them safe from the flu, too. /s
What would be better is polluting the software with invalid but still plausible constraints, so the chips would seem OK and might work for days or weeks but would fail in the field… especially if these chips are used in weapon systems or critical infrastructure.
It’s a pretty big presumption that Elon Musk is providing transparent and accurate information to consumers about a technology he’s hoping to sell. While I’d agree with the premise normally, he’s kind of a known bad actor at this point. I’m a pretty firm believer in informed consent for this kinda stuff, I just don’t see much reason to trust Musk is willing to fully inform someone of the limitations, constraints or risks involved in anything he has a personal stake in. If you aren’t informed, you can’t provide consent.
Nothing. It’s a pretty fantasy. Best I think we can hope for is a few monopolies busted up so some little guys can break into the market. That’ll buy us about 20 years until those little guys have become the new Googles and Microsofts and Apples, and then we start over. We need to entirely rewrite how we do antitrust assessments to account for both vertical and horizontal monopolistic behaviors (a vertical monopoly is a company that controls the entire supply chain where a horizontal one controls the market and customer base. Historically, the US has been more concerned with horizontal monopolies.) It’d be great if we could come up with a better measure of consumer choice that we currently use. If you have the choice between 2 ISPs but they both charge the same amount for the same service, you don’t really have a choice there…at least not a meaningful one.
You really don’t need anything near as complex as AI…a simple script could be configured to automatically close the issue as solved with a link to a randomly-selected unrelated issue.
Did you read the whole article? Newsweek misrepresented the results by leaving out other answers that clearly demonstrate the vast majority think Hamas is a terrorist organization and the Oct 7th attacks were terroristic and genocidal in intent. The sample size was far too small. You’ll notice they didn’t even tell you what the actual question asked was. There’s a big difference between “do you support Hamas” and “do you support the Palestinian government” or “do you support Palestinian efforts to defend against Israeli attacks?” Surveys in general, and especially ones on politically decisive ideas, are notoriously easy to skew based on subtle differences in how you word questions. I’d recommend you be very suspicious of any report on a survey that doesn’t tell you what was actually asked.
From a shit survey misquoted by a failed Republican sycophant. Echo chamber.
If you think that’s what’s happening, you’ve been in an echo chamber yourself.
It’s OK to call anyone not aligned with the Republican Party a Nazi, because it’s important that words have no real meaning. Once words have no meaning, the ideas behind them fade as well. This is double plus ungood.
I imagine the implementation would cost them more than the fine…