At least Apple claimed years ago that iPhones used GPS when available and used a database of WiFi network locations otherwise. Because in the locations where you donâ(TM)t get GPS you typically get tons of WiFi signals.

One example is AlphaFold an AI program which predicts folded protein structures "with near experimental accuracy" from amino acid base sequences. This ability is going to have a huge impact on many practical problems like pharmaceutical development, agricultural science, and engineering custom proteins. For example, since the human genome has been long since sequenced, the program means we now, with a fairly high degree of certainty, know what all the protein coding sequences make.

I'd say that's a pretty significant result.

If you work in technology long enough, you see this over and over. Every time something new comes along, it's actual usefulness gets buried in the breathless media response by a mountain of bullshit. But that doesn't mean the uses aren't real.

You're not wrong, but you are.

The laws ARE garbage. If a test can be rigged, it will be. This is the nature of how things are. China WILL win, if we continue to regulate ourselves out of competition.

The US has a similar problem, we have CAFE standards that were SUPPOSED to require car manufacturers to increase efficiencies to IMPOSSIBLE levels. The problem is, those rules only applied to "cars". Almost all US car manufacturers have stopped making cars, and the ones they are building are largely big muscle cars, and not fuel efficient ones. Instead, they are building SUVs that aren't "cars" but are classed as "trucks" and exempt, and a few Hybrids that really nobody actually wants.

The law of unintended consequences is undefeated

Using excess solar for electrolysis of water is one possibility of energy storage. While batteries are an option too, the disposal of battery technologies like lithium-ion, lead acid, and nickel-cadmium present their own problems. Sodium-ion seems to be a better possibility in the future as well but they have only recently been available..

In your earlier post, you said: "Europe has massively INCREASED dependence on Russian energy". Did you lie?

When I say Germany for example has zero oil and gas production I mean the country of Germany. Your claim that it is misleading because countries near Germany has production is basically another lie.

Comrade, you just gave up the fact you are Russian. Nice try Putin.

Citation needed, Comrade Putin.

You left out the fact coal needs machines to collect.

Terrible comparisons does not excuse your misstatements.

You presented none of this. Your only statements were how bad solar was while not disclosing the coal was far worse.

Pure EROI does not factors like pollution, supply chains, and practicality. Ignoring things seems to be your modus operandi.

Presenting the costs and requirements of one thing while ignoring the other option has higher requirements is rigging. Like I said you can say renting a house is cheaper than owning because owning requires a mortgage and utilities.

What studies? Is this yet another thing you did not present to anyone?

Again. You are relying on a single factor. Other factors have no place in your world. By your logic, every country in the world should use nuclear then coal despite the fact coal and nuclear fuel do not exist everywhere.

How about looking at the real world? Coal plants are being shut down even in red states. The main reason: they are more expensive (despite your EROI factor) to operate than other types of plants. That operating cost does not include the fact they pollute more.

So no one should use solar because you only rely on one factor in your calculation for the entire world. You don't see a problem with your analysis?

I am saying using burning hydrogen is one method that can used when solar is not available.

There are alternatives like battery banks, molten salt, compressed air. All of these will depend on what is available in the location. Using a closed loop hydrogen/water loop is a possbility.

"There ought to be a law"

Every bad law starts out with "good intentions" as if that was enough. Results don't matter, only the intent. Results can be horrible but if you oppose it, "You want bad things to happen" and are

When the Ruskies need to hit a 2m MTA exhaust port located among skyscrapers to blow up the city, this technology is really going to help them a lot.

I had no concern with Joe Biden being Catholic, but I *would* think something was fishy with the *Electoral College* if six of the last nine presidents were Catholic given that fewer than one in five Americans are Catholic.

I'm not saying Catholics (or Jews) shouldn't serve on the Supreme Court, although maybe it would be good idea to have some justices who weren't Catholic or Jewish. Maybe an atheist, or polytheist.

Talk about false comparisons and outright lies. A veggie burger is LABELED as vegetarian (and sometimes vegan). To say it is "deceptive" is as idiotic as saying it is deceptive that margarine looks like butter and is not butter. It is on the label.

So in another post unrelated to your demand that the world conform to you, someone misread the label for an ingredient to which his daughter was allergic. Do you have a point?

So you don't know of anyone who actually uses these products but everyone should conform to your wishes. Basically: it does not affect you if veggie burgers are sold in your local store, but screw any vegetarians as the stores should not offer it.

Dude, what is the point of this story? To illustrate how ignorant you are of other people's dietary restrictions? As soon as you said, "kosher", I already knew they would have 0 pork products. Zero. That's part of being "kosher".

Again: You don't have to eat the veggie burger. But you are adamant that no one else have them either because they are made in a certain form factor for convenience.

So in summary: in your world there are no vegetarians. But in your world you find it deceptive that no one has offered something that looks like meat but isn't. In other words, it has not affected nor will affect you but the world must conform to your wishes regardless.

One of the casualties of the Internet has been newspaper science desks. In the post Sputnik era, major city newspapers built teams of reporters with science and technology backgrounds to cover breaking science stories. To make use of that manpower in between big stories, they'd do a weekly science supplement, which was one of my favorite parts to read. These bureaus even had people on staff who could cover breaking news in *mathematics*.

That's all gone now, and you can see the impact of that in the scientifically ignorant summary you are objecting to. Twenty years ago, no major city newspaper would ever print anything that stupid. Today just the New York Times and Washington Post still have a newspaper science desk, and those are much reduced. Smaller newspapers barely cover local government anymore, they tend to just reprint opinion, purchased content, and press releases by politicians and corporations, and dueling reading letters on hot button issues. Actual shoe leather find out the facts journalism is in steep decline. In other words cheap content is more profitable, and science reporting is the least profitable content of all. The most widely consumed remaining sources of science information are non-profit -- the public broadcasting outlets.

I've been online for a while and have not noticed Philadelphia being singled out in any way. Everything in the article's "notorious cultural touchstones" is unknown to me. Not that I'm celebrating my ignorance, but I just haven't seen anyone discussing those particular topics.

on the internet, Philly culture is inescapable

From my point of view, on the internet Philly culture is just one of thousands, not particularly emphasized.

I suspect the author has some connection to that city which has caused him to read about it more than average.

Most of these statements are at best half true. The issue is the poster uses "local" to mean country only while discussing all of Europe.

Europe has decreased dependence on Russian energy overall since Ukraine. While imports increased this year, Europe has reduced their dependence by 90%. This is simply not true.

The phrasing of this is somewhat true and somewhat false. Individually countries have phased out certain national initiatives. For example, Germany has closed their nuclear plants; however, German has massively installed wind power to replace these plants. From the standpoint of oil and gas, Norway has replaced Russia by becoming Europe's largest exporter of oil and gas.

For individual countries that has never been true. Germany for example has zero oil and gas production. They rely on Norway, the Netherlands, and the US for these things. However Germany has the largest base of wind power.

[sarcasm]Yes because no other state or country uses concrete any more. Red states avoid concrete entirely as concrete is too "woke". Texas replaced concrete is their massive highway system with hopes and prayers. [/sarcasm]