junippor

Fluff aside, here's the actual science:

> ( ... ) researchers from the Salk Institute and Kunming University of Science and Technology ( ... )

> In lab tests in culture, the team started with monkey blastocysts. Six days after fertilization they were injected with 25 human extended pluripotent stem (hEPS) cells, which contribute to the tissue as the embryo develops.

> And sure enough, when the researchers examined the batch of embryos 24 hours later, they detected human cells in 132 of them. After 10 days, there were 103 of these chimeric embryos remaining, but by day 19 only three still survived. After that, the embryos were terminated before they developed any further.

Saved you a click.

I'm guessing that the reason why this is called a chimera and not just a blob of cells from two different species is that the number of human cells increased from 25 to 132. But this seems like a very low bar to me...? I'm guessing that if you keep cells which you just extracted from a living organism and keep them in a comfortable bath, division might occur before they quickly die out.

> some of which are not subordinate to your state

Yeah, unlike representative democracy which works great /s

I think the point is that it's not "supernatural". Conceptually you could implement it. The opening and closing involves zero work. In reality the work won't be zero due to friction, but you can in principle at least approximate it really well.

Yes, very deeply.

I'm suggesting that anyone using Ubuntu would be better served by using debian :-) Thanks for asking :-)

New phenomenon for Americans.

The manufacturing process is a matter of precision engineering. "Remaining stuck" is just... psychologically difficult? How do you compare which one is "more difficult"?

Your comment makes absolutely no sense.

I don't know any details, but my understanding if that manufacturing vaccines is quite difficult.

It's just a prank bro!

> scanning WhatsApp chat backups uploaded to Google Drive

I've always assumed this was the case, but has this been proven?

Understanding doesn't come into this. Most people don't understand money any farther than $5 + $5 = $10, and it still works really well. Unlike bitcoin.

Again, the limitations with funding with money aren't a tech problem. The limitation aren't "regulations", or how "fast" you can send money. They're a legal one. There's literally no obstacle in wiring some startup some money. Where an obstacle DOES exist, is in you being able to credibly defend a claim on that equity in a court.

Imagine the following situation:

You: "I own 10% of the startup"

Judge: "You have no contract that proves that...."

You: "But I sent crypto instead of money!!"

Judge: "Oh in that case...!"

It's like when the word "crypto" is involved, people immediately surrender any critical thinking :-|