zakk
Joined 11 years ago
Joined 11 years ago
On the contrary, this means that there are too many virtual particles (gluons) being exchanged inside a proton, so many that perturbation theory is not applicable.
So basically they replaced a CO2-neutral energy source, with another which is pretty CO2-intensive.
Renewable does not mean good for the environment!
Geological repositories are an excellent solution. Those place are geologically stable, and can contain thousand of years of wastes. It’s not very expensive to collect wastes there, as well!
There are super-safe and rather cheap ways of treating and storing nuclear waste!
It’s essentially a scaremongering talking point.
Telling of the status of the field.
Is there a permanent solution, that does not involve cron scripts or other hacks?
They make toy bricks, they actually make the freaking best toy bricks ever… Just stick to that!
I know I might be exceedingly idealistic, and as soon as MBAs and consultants take over a company things need to change, but have strong feelings towards LEGO and I am fine being idealistic here!
And the moral of the history is: in 2020 the COVID lab-leak hypothesis was considered a nasty idea, one that only uneducated, bitter conspiracy theorists could support. People have been banned from the effective monopolists of public discourse over this idea.
Then sometime around 2021 the same idea became acceptable.
Not surprisingly, this change in the public perception of this idea over social media followed the viewpoint of the major political party the owners of social media cheer for.
This is bad, bad, bad for political discourse and rational thinking!!
As far as I am concerned: long love the free market of ideas!
People can discuss things that are not law.
One can point out, for instance, that Twitter is not a free speech platform, and this is bad for many reasons.
One can comment on laws, proposing to extend legal protections to different sectors.
I hope your conversations are not solely based on current law, that must be pretty boring.
(You interpretation of Section 230 is shaky at least)
I find this deeply troubling. So the seeds were provided by the NSA and they said "don't worry, they were generated hashing a trivial sentence. Unfortunately we forgot it now, but trust us, it's just Jerry joking about getting a raise, nothing more..."
I can't believe this didn't undergo further scrutiny earlier, and I can't believe the seeds haven't been chosen in a more sensible way, such as combining random seeds provided by different parties with competing interests, also including hardware RNGs, etc...