ac42

Let's call BS.

It's inane to claim existence being the root of all evil, because, yeah, it's the root of friggin' _everything_.

Nothing is forced on "you" because without existence there is no "you". Or anti-natalists could just as easily be blamed of "depriving" the non-born of their chance to live. Ouch.

I, for one, enjoy life (and don't you dare tell me I just don't realise it sucks). I even like working on the hard bits, like underpaid shopkeepers and inhumane working hours, thank you.

Does this factor in the wetware upkeep during the development cycle? Development in C generally is slower than in most of the other languages.

> I also have never heard the fans

We all do now

The Python of drawing tools.

Oh crap, now I see it. Thanks!

I am not clear why the proof is so long. By induction, the first i elements are already smaller than the A[i], so it's essentially an unoptimised version of

for i: 0..n-1 A[i] = min(A[i:n])

> Would it be possible to develop a computer from linear transformations?

Yes. The transition function of Turing machines and the working tape can be represented as linear transformations. For quantum computers, these transformations even need to be unitary.

This very standard construction does not conflict with the halting problem: you don't know how often you have to apply this linear transform to your state vector until you got your result.

The article has the wrong caption I would think ("running K3s on a bunch of PIs" would be more fitting).

Netbooting a bare metal environment is quite straightforward for the PI 3 (dnsmasq has it all) and takes around 15-30 secs.

Since there is no technical definition (not to speak of a measure of degree) of consciousness, we could assume that it is very likely, statistically. All life forms have undergone the same amount of evolution, after all. And even if we are wrong, this assumption would do this world great good.