This is a news report that is not based on any peer reviewed publication, or even a preprint. It has no value. Until the researchers publish, we won't be able to look at their methods and data to figure out whether their result is credible.

The comment at the top of this thread created confusion by using the words "telegraph" and "announce" as though they were synonymous: "Putin telegraphed to everyone weeks in advance in no uncertain terms he was going to invade Ukraine. Perhaps they should use an example of predicting an event that wasn't publicly announced beforehand.

It is FLOSS, licensed under GPL. FLOSS provides the opportunity to maintain the software, but as the fine article observes, it doesn't provide incentives for people to do the work. The incentives, are the problem, not the availability of the code.

Meanwhile, Mattermost has a FOSS alternative with most of the same functionality as Slack.

Here is a list of other FOSS alternatives to Slack.

According to Wikipedia,

This is the sunk-cost fallacy.

If the market price for XBT is persistently a lot less than 40K, and you need money to cover the cost of living, then it doesn't matter how much it cost you to mine them in the past. The $40K cost of mining is already spent, and you can't get it back. You will sell or spend the XBTs at current market prices and eat the loss.

It's absolutely their right not to do business in California.

But if they do want to do business in California, they need to follow California law.

The judge wrote that the proposition would have been valid if it were an amendment to the state Constitution. However, this proposition was not posed to the voters as a Constitutional Amendment, so it must be subordinate to the Constituiton.

You are completely right about the safety of nuclear power.

About China Syndrome, there is some important context. Right after the China Syndrome movie was released, nuclear power advocates quickly denounced it as utterly unrealistic, saying that it was impossible to have an accident like the one described in the movie: a loss of coolant accident that was caused by a malfunctioning gauge reporting excessive cooling water levels when the water levels were actually dangerously low because a valve got stuck, resulting in core melting.

Twelve days later, Three Mile Island had a loss of coolant accident caused by a malfunctioning gauge reporting excessive cooling water levels when the water levels were actually dangerously low because a valve got stuck, resulting in core melting.

No one was injured or killed by the Three Mile Island accident, but less than two weeks earlier, nuclear power experts had said that this kind of accident was impossible, and that killed public trust in nuclear reactors.

"The term [GPU] was first used by Sony in 1994 with the launch of the PS1. That system had a 32-bit Sony GPU (designed by Toshiba)." — Jon Peddie, "Is it Time to Rename the GPU?".

In other words, the important technology came from government programs, not innovation funded by capitalist private investment.

This is a very important point, but I would make one correction: Pork and chicken have very similar greenhouse gas emissions footprints, both of which are much smaller than beef and lamb.

According to this paper, by a major emissions modeling group, "the livestock sector ... accounts for 18% of [global] greenhouse gas emissions."

The paper then finds that "a global transition to a low meat-diet ... would reduce the mitigation costs to achieve a 450 ppm CO2-eq. stabilisation target by about 50%."

Exactly. Right now, the analysis says there is nothing magical about a certain level; as you say, "there is pretty much some of everything pretty much everywhere." What the EPA is doing is to replace a cost-benefit analysis (which balances the costs of reducing pollution against the benefits of reducing illness and death) with an analysis that says, "when the concentrations go below this arbitrary level, the risk magically becomes exactly zero."

It's hard to do a sensible cost-benefit analysis if you assume that there is a magical level where everything becomes perfectly safe, and that's what the EPA is proposing to do.

The debate over hard-forking Etherium demonstrates that even technological currency systems rely on trust in human governance. Thus, I'd see this more as people putting trust in technocrats (i.e., a perceived meritocracy) versus elected officials (i.e., democratic populism).