xorbax

Without knowing any specifics, I wonder if this is a thing where the small-scale almost works, and they assume the larger scale will iron out inefficiencies.

Is anyone better versed in this? It seems strangely opaque for such a large-scale project.

Shame he doesn't know enough to formulate a theory that this data could be compared to.

Maybe people will give him enough money to rent a scientist who can do the actual work for making it a coherent hypothesis that JWST data can be compared to.

It was a blog post, not science.

That's the amusing part. It's interesting it got as much interaction as it did

Lame that you can't obviously choose to show the last two weeks of the total.

There will now be a CEO (Chief Executive Orderer) who will statistically balance fastfood orders during times requiring late nights to maintain normal public-facing order activity.

Or their boss will tell them to order "anything but a pizza . . . You all saw the website!", so it becomes an inverse indicator.

But are you accomplishing the same amount and being equally effective, or just accomplishing less over the same amount of time?

If it's allowed to continue, which seems very shakey at the moment. NASA's would from DOGE will result in projects - even mostly completed one - being trashed.

Because it appears to be a massive data breach involving unqualified and unvetted random citizens. It was useless in terms of its own states goals, was randomly abandoned, and likely did damage that will take years to fully comprehend. Using our tax dollars, destroying our investments, and we're supposed to brush it off as no big deal? Were it some 20 year old hired by Soros I'm sure you'd muster interest.

People who have kids know it will be on streaming and can't afford the theatre. Figure it out. This isn't nostalgia IP, it's for actual children. Like who live in families with budgets and priorities. Catch me when the streaming numbers post.

How does "Blowtorch" handle things like the gravitational lensing difference between baryon-only and the fact that dark matter is able to account for it [1]?

I know the theory doesn't do anything mathematically, but I'm curious how you deal with the unexplained mass issues. Does it explain things like galactic rotation [2]?

1. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11214-024-01087-w

2. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_rotation_curve

Wasn't there also a text-to-speech voiceover of the local forecast text?

I would have sworn they would replace the music with a guy "reading" the forecast.

Actually a LOL line. A long with his very skilled and meaningful schematic.

Is this where we are intellectually? Complaining about too much proof and rigor? Just run it through chatGPT or something and ask it to read it for you

> My favorite example is an X11 windows manager implementing in about 18 lines of python.

Uh, do you happen to know where to find that project? Sounds pretty comprehensible for most people as an example.

I mean, we just have integrated pocket-watches.

Are there clocks in your casino so people can note how long they've been playing?

But there's not reason to think anything was cut

You could define it as "the degradation of cellular maintenance". Androgenic hair loss is more like a non universal signal of hormonal maturity, like pubic hair growth.

Also, recreation is technology. If it turns out that ten mammoths are more efficient and require less human maintenance to modulate tundra and encourage the ecocycle, we know how to do it. We don't need to start a 50 year investment in 2050 and hope it works. Mammoths are likely to be equally or more useful than AI image generation or gigantic warehouses that sequester carbon given various precision-machined parts and chemical engineering. Animals are more efficient and require fewer externalities than most human endeavors. Even if we just ignore the externalities and admire these new impressive technologies. Life is very efficient.

That seems more like a fun sci-fi speculation

Because photons behave in a fundamentally different way than sound. See the Michelson-Morley experiment.

I mean, yeah there's tons of theoretical work. Predictions about lensing and structure have been done and verified. We've taken pictures of black holes. Susskind did a big fancy simulation for Interstellar that lined up great with them.

Perhaps if someone who gets the language did it for today's date, we'd both get some clarity. I've tried working backwards but the labyrinthine explanation doesn't project

This might be the first time I get a joke's punchline but not the setup

This is why I think Akira can't be surpassed. Not just because it was done on acetate, but because of the level of skill and consideration required to animate that way. You can't just undo that brush stroke onto the cel and try something else.

As much as technology has democratized the field, I think it also lowers the heights. I desperately hope I'm wrong and just old, but I haven't met someone who puts up something that they think is better. Maybe it's just because we're in the transitory phase - but digital animation has been around for decades at this point. Maybe it's Ikea versus handcrafting, and the shift is in the expected quality rather than the art elevating itself to meet priors.

Except you don't know what your vision would be if you didn't have correction, so I'm not sure how that actually says anything

I think it's great. For both, problem is extremes of apathy to actual consideration of the effects in society and lack of rational regulations.

The important part should be understanding the whys and building access to a robust nonpunitive way out for those who want it.

But the profits of addiction are too important either way.

Just like crack and fentanyl! Let the market decide, cowards.

Although it is fun that it's totally fine for an American company to take the reins and continue on.

This could have been done with emphasis on the way China engineers TikTok/Douyin in each country and the effects on the end users - but that wouldn't make anyone with money or power very happy. The thing it does is fine - merely where the data goes and who pulls the levers is the concern.

The "ban" will change nothing in our society, thank God.

You tell us. You're working with the same internet as the rest of us.