To put out a hacker prize for laid off employees to target big AI companies for data center elimination.

Only somewhat correct. Unemployed because the AI companies convinced the CEOs that they can cut headcount and be fine.

And with 50% of the software engineers in 2019 now unemployed (even among senior level developers) they'll have you reviewing that code for minimum wage.

Seen Youtube lately? I just watched a video on how to make nitroglycerin. Stuff like this has been available for over a decade.

Back in the days that home solar systems still mostly used lead-acid batteries - which in some cases of degradation could be repaired, at least partially, if you had some good strong and reasonably pure sulfuric acid - I viewed a YouTube video on how to make it. (From epsom salts by electrolysis using a flowerpot and some carbon rods from old large dry cells).

For months afterward YouTube "suggested" I'd be interested in videos from a bunch of Islamic religious leaders . (This while people were wondering how Islamic Terrorists were using the Internet to recruit among high-school out-group nerds.)

Software - AI and otherwise - often creates unintended consequences. B-)

If their government in China had their ass so far in their rectum to refuse global warming as factual, and promoted coal like Trump/GOP did, they would not be doing renewable like crazy.

The more important is not whether it is a democracy or a dictatorial regime, the more important factor was : they are not rejecting basic science.

If both side of the aisle accepted global warming and had the will to fight, you would see the same effort in the US. Unfortunately you have the GOP which is anti science. So instead you get a dead end.

Back in 2008, it was said that within a decades or two the storm surge would rise by a few inch , which would bring them further inland. This one example about how storm surge would be bigger : https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencedaily.com%2Fr... The problem is that people like him are a bit clueless , they misremember, misinterpret, and then their misinterpretation/misremembering becomes "a failed prediction about global warming". That is, when they are even educated enough to even understand any article about AGW.

Eddie Cus channeling his best inner Eddie Murphy circa Beverly Hills Cop: âoe That searches are down story... was working okay. It was working. You guys just messed it up.â

I trust Weather Underground instead- it's private citizens, not government propaganda, and it's far more accurate.

Post-COVID, I don't trust governments or corporations to do science. I saw too much statistical abuse, p-hacking, politics, and outright lying about the scientific method to trust federal funding OR corporate funding of science.

Science is best done by private citizens funding their own experiments with outside jobs, not academic peer-review cancel culture bubbles.

You are correct. Shipping per ocean, depending on some factor takes 15 to 30 days. The full weight of the tariff will start 30 days from the announcement - so basically start of may to mid may shipping will again drop down hard.

It's kind of surprising it isn't all squealing nonsense.

Give it a little more time. B-b

We had a lab known to be unsafe. A lab known to be performing gain of function on the specific type of virus that emerged in public. We have a lab in close proximity to the market where the outbreak was traced back to.

We also had rumors that low-paid lab techs supplemented their income by selling test animals they'd been ordered to destroy to the nearby wet market.

So current AI training procedures - which amount to "read all the internet you can" - fall for astroturf campaigns. Why am I not surprised?

...an article worth considering from Princeton University's Zeynep Tufekci:

We Were Badly Misled About the Event That Changed Our Lives

Since scientists began playing around with dangerous pathogens in laboratories, the world has experienced four or five pandemics, depending on how you count. One of them, the 1977 Russian flu, was almost certainly sparked by a research mishap. Some Western scientists quickly suspected the odd virus had resided in a lab freezer for a couple of decades, but they kept mostly quiet for fear of ruffling feathers.

Yet in 2020, when people started speculating that a laboratory accident might have been the spark that started the Covid-19 pandemic, they were treated like kooks and cranks. Many public health officials and prominent scientists dismissed the idea as a conspiracy theory, insisting that the virus had emerged from animals in a seafood market in Wuhan, China. And when a nonprofit called EcoHealth Alliance lost a grant because it was planning to conduct risky research into bat viruses with the Wuhan Institute of Virology â" research that, if conducted with lax safety standards, could have resulted in a dangerous pathogen leaking out into the world â" no fewer than 77 Nobel laureates and 31 scientific societies lined up to defend the organization.

So the Wuhan research was totally safe, and the pandemic was definitely caused by natural transmission â" it certainly seemed like consensus.

We have since learned, however, that to promote the appearance of consensus, some officials and scientists hid or understated crucial facts, misled at least one reporter, orchestrated campaigns of supposedly independent voices and even compared notes about how to hide their communications in order to keep the public from hearing the whole story. And as for that Wuhan laboratoryâ(TM)s research, the details that have since emerged show that safety precautions might have been terrifyingly lax.

Full article