Sonori @ sonori @beehaw.org

Posts

12

Comments

424

Joined

2 yr. ago

The researchers who wrote the paper only mentioned possibly applying the tech to very small things like wearables and Iot applications where a large capacitor might be relevant. It’s the journalist summarizing it that makes the wild claims about phones and cars, which don’t tend to use capacitors for a bunch of reasons, not least of which is that they tend to be physically twenty times larger than a given battery of the same capacity.

If people are able to deal with batteries anywhere near that large, then I’d imagine most of them would choose twenty times the battery life/ range over being able to charge fast enough overload a wall outlet/ small power plant.

If it makes you feel any better, modern climate and economic studies have shown that even a full scale nuclear war involving every nuclear power at the height of the Cold War and when nuclear stockpiles were far larger than today we still wouldn’t have come very close to actually killing off all the humans on earth, with the vast majority of the casualties being owed to famine in regions that were/are heavily dependent on western fertilizer. Indeed entire nations in the southern hemisphere tend to get through such senecios without much of an direct effect from world war three.

Mostly this change from earlier predictions came from being able rule out the theory of a nuclear winter as climate modeling became more accurate and we could be sure that the secondary fires from such a war could not carry ash into the upper atmosphere in significant quantities, which was practically shown when a climate change fueled wildfire in Australia got so large that it should have been able to carry the ash into the upper atmosphere under nuclear winter theory but none was observed, validating modern climate models.

Also, dispite what some less scrupulous journalists trying to drum up clicks have posted on the Ukraine War, the Russian government itself hasn’t really made any major signaling moves with regards to bringing nukes into the conflict, and indeed has maintained and repeatedly reiterated Putin’s 2010s no first use policy when asked.

Don’t get me wrong, this is not the result of some greater Russian morals or whatever, but just a consequence of the inherent risk that such posturing could lead to nuclear escalation and breaking the nuclear taboo or even just other nations actually believing they plan to, and such scenarios end very badly for Russia in general and Putin in particular.

Don’t forget Putin bravely defending himself against western imperialism by invading neighboring nations, and how he must secretly be a communist no matter how much of the country he has privatized and sold off to his cronies.

Primarily LFP, and as for cars that currently use them, off the top of my head base model Teslas, Fords, some Kia, and basically everything BYD or other Chinese manufacturers export use it.

Ment to hedge that with the qualifier often, as some manufacturers with little competition or reason to make cheap EVs do just use a cut down high end cobalt battery bank and pass the large additional cost onto the customer. It is a practice that is increasingly going away, and when it comes to things like moving everyone to EVs the general assumption is that regardless of what Amarican manufacturers want, most of them will go with the lower cost and longer lived chemistries over the premium density ones.

Neglecting that Cobalt isn’t even used in non-luxury EV’s in favor of cheaper chemistries like LFP or Sodium Ion, it’s worth noting that while so called ‘artisanal mining’ has been supplying much of the cobalt needed for over a half century now in oil processing, it’s being replaced by larger and cheaper industrial mines as demand for cobalt in electronics and premium EVs grew.

Not that such industrial mining doesn’t come with local environmental costs, or that we shouldn’t work on better recycling capture for personal electronics, but sticking with oil sure hasn’t done anything to help the Congo so far.

Opinion pieces on the Internet and political saber rattling by low level politicians does not a nuclear policy make.

States actually have quite a few different ways of signaling they are serious about potentially ending the world as we know it, and Russia is currently using none of them.

As an example, the Russian state’s own published nuclear policy has remained unchanged for over a decade and still explicitly prohibits nuclear first use in cases like this. Currently high level Russian politicians including Putin continue to reference said defense policy in response to questions about the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine. If they were seriously considering using said nuclear weapons in Ukraine, they would be unambiguously signaling through changing these documents and other such methods that other governments actually take seriously.

More to the point, breaking the nuclear taboo would be massively harmful to both Russia and Putins own interests. It would at best result in a NATO backed no fly zone over Ukraine while China and Iran completely abandon them, and quite possibly result in a direct conventional or nuclear war with Nato. I simply don’t buy that they would do that with no warning or previous signaling simply because an artillery rocket was manufactured in a different country.

I mean, the government has mandated that all cars built since the 90s have to have a lot of computers and sensors for engine monitoring and emissions logging so that ship has long since sailed. Automatic braking is also credited with eliminating something like 1 in 5 fatalities in car accidents, so as long as we have any motorized vehicles around at all I don’t really have a problem with the government requiring manufacturers to spend the extra 20 dollars or so per vehicle it costs them to add a few ultrasonic sensors and a microcontroller it takes to slow the vehicle to the point where a driving into a pedestrian might just be survivable.

Yep, at the very least there is a reason that all the democracies the US helped establish post world war two, to my knowledge none of them were recommended to closely mirror the US system. The fundamental US government was a decent enough step in the right for a british colony in the 1700s, but there has been over two hundred years of learning and improvements since. The problem is that while nearly everyone who’s studied governmental structures recognizes the problem, it’s very hard to get someone to understand a problem when their job requires not understanding it, and the general public doesn’t have enough knowledge or passion to force the issue.

While I think in this case they won’t have an effect because no Amarican company is even trying to compete in the space, I feel like claiming “history says tarrifs rarely work” is pretty misleading. The high tarrifs caused by the US generating nearly all federal income by tarrifs in the 17 and 18 hundreds are after all widely credited with being the reason the northern US went from being a minor agricultural nation dependent entirely on european industrial goods to becoming one of the largest industrialized nations so quickly.

Indeed that was why the WTO blocking third world nations from putting tarrifs on western goods was so heavily criticized by the left a few decades ago, before China proved you could do it without said tarrifs so long as your competitors were greedy enough to outsource their industry to you.

The hard part would things like water and raw building materials, one of the benefits of ground is that it’s mostly iron, oxygen, and other metals, while basically everything on Venus would need to be shipped in from off world.

So what your saying is that you have gone through years of therapists telling you not to transition every two weeks, and accidentally been given a medication that delayed the decision until you were more mature and which you could stop taking at any time with no serious side effects. Turely that was a fate so horrible that it’s worth taking the decision away from the thirty thousand English for which it was demonstrably the right decision.

The scientists of the 1880s, through every decade up to the modern day were all so terrified of being called transphobes that they secretly conspired to fake the entire field’s research? Right, that makes sense.

You definitely promise that they’d be canceled too, and not given constant interviews by the Daily Mail, Fox News(the largest and most watched television news station in America), and the BBC(looking to show both sides of banning only certain people from getting otherwise uncontroversial and freely prescribed medication). None of thouse outlets would ever be interested in interviewing them say things their editors are pushing for.

They would also certainly not then get millions in dollars to continue their research by groups like the Heritage Foundation, the group which in 2016 focused group tested ways to create new culture war issues and identified the decades old practice of prescribing puberty blockers to children who have fought through years of therapy as one of the effective things for conservative outlets and politicians to push.

Yes, questioning children should be given love, therapy, and the choice to delay the permanent changes brought on by puberty until they are an adult and can make an informed decision, and not forced to because a politician copied an American far right party’s method to distract voters form the impacts of their economic policies by screwing over the thirty thousand English who are physically incapable of otherwise loving their own bodies.

Trans people know they should be the other gender and that puberty causes massive permanent changes to their body they are horrified by. They often do not know that everyone else around them’s deepest fantasy isn’t to wake up one day as the other sex.

They do not know that there is a easy and harmless way to delay these permanent changes effecting their bodies until they are an adult and can make a informed decision, that if started early enough these medications create a path to eliminate the need for nearly all of the intensive surgeries that are otherwise in their future, can be stoped at any time if they don’t want to continue with it, or that these medications are deemed harmless enough to be freely handed out to their fellow cis children for a wide body of disorders, but which the NHS suddenly requires years of regular therapy trying to talk them out of it to “prove” they are deserving of if there is even a hint of them being trans.

Yes, this means that the NHS has for decades required that the child and their parents must know they are trans and how they feel about the exact effect of puberty years before the child even starts puberty in order to gain the majority of the benefits from these medications which doctors can freely prescribe for non trans children without any of these barriers.

When you talk about the recent UK “research” you are talking about the Cass report yes? The report that outright stated it ignored over a century of scientific research because thouse papers went double blind, meaning they secretly gave an equal number of cis children puberty blockers without their knowledge or gave trans children sugar pills without them realizing they are still going through puberty, which was subsequently ridiculed as a purely politically driven by hundreds of UK pediatricians and experts in the field, who’s authors were actively helping draft policy with American far right politicians that defines a child gaining any acess to puberty blockers or even social transition as child abuse and requiring years of prison time for the parents, and who despite all this own author’s stated that even with their standards that while the NHS gives little support for non-binary children the high barriers it maintains against trans children pausing puberty, socially transitioning, and other forms of gender confirming care are actively harming them.

But hey, if so many people are apparently treating acess to these medications as no big deal dispite all the evidence to the contrary, why do nearly half of trans people in the UK end of having to get these medications from grey market dealers in southern europe instead of their local chemist?

While the paper demonstrated strong diminishing returns in adding more data to modern neural networks in terms of image classifers, the video host is explaining how the same may effect apply to any nureal network based system with modern transformers.

While there are technically methods of generative AI that don’t use a neural network, they haven’t made much progress in recent decades and arn’t what most people mean when they hear or say generative AI, and as such I would say the title is accurate enough for a video meant for a general audience, though “Is there a fundamental limit to modern neural networks” might be more technically correct.

But if we don’t feed the entire internet into Siri, China would, and you don’t want China to have an advantage in the autocomplete wars, now do you?/s

I’m not the specific target of the question since my family always turns out to vote, but I’d imagine some of the big ones are people not knowing that they have a legal right in many states to take paid time off work to vote, general apathy, voter suppression making it very difficult to vote in some areas, and given the swing in turnout between presidential and non presidential elections, a lot of people who only pay attention to the presidential elections because they get nationwide coverage dispite your local and district votes bro by a whole lot more important when it comes to effects on your life and keeping extremists from implementing their policies.

Not much, but April 12th saw the first person enter orbit, so I think this person is saying that Bush secretly helped prepare the way for the Soviet Union put Yuri Gagarin into space.

I have just the video to fix that, - Dosh Doshington

I can’t imagine any sort of verification system not being completely overrun by bots/people on fiver/ mechanical turk immediately unless you tied it to meatspace IDs in an know your customer sort of way, in which case you would definitely need a central organization to do said verification, which eliminates any possible need for a blockchain as said organization can just use a faster, far cheaper, and most importantly for this application editable database.

More to the point, no one doubts that an article published by one organization was secretly published by another, but rather that they secretly used AI in the writing process, which also negates the system because that organization is never going to tell you which articles are done by AI, and any sort of reporting system for the entire organization or a specific author is just going to be immediately and constantly used to review bomb.