That used to be the case. Now you automatically get copyright whether you want to or not. I forget which law (or possibly intentional treaty) changed that.

* What programming language ?

* Will they open source it ?

* Is the source code maintainable ?

If this really works and the result is open source there could be many interesting uses. I would love to see Larry's reaction to the request: Write a clone of the Oracle database.

Someone earlier claimed that this violated the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse laws. This seems probable to me. But enforcement is the kicker. If the law isn't enforced, it effectively doesn't exist. (Random enforcement is legitimate (but expensive) grounds for having a case dismissed.

Again, here motivation matters. If you stayed up programming because you wanted to, then it's a positive. If you stayed up because you had to, then it's a negative.

Maximizing efficiency in algorithms is often useful, but often it's better to get a correct answer quickly. I can program in C, or C++ or Fortran IV, but I often choose Python. You need to pick the right tool for the job.

The problems I'm thinking of are those of the last several decades. That's LONG after they were useful military reactors. But if you prefer I could talk about the PG&E reactor built below a cliff and just about on an active earthquake fault (Diablo Canyon). That one got enough public notice that it was shut down, Perhaps many of the reasons were silly, but that was an EXTREMELY stupid location.

And, of course, one of the real problems is that there's no way to reprocess the spent fuel. And no acceptable place to store it.

It's not *that* bad a bet. There are probably places where a humanoid robot only slightly better than today's existing models would be useful. The real question is "How many of them?", and that clearly depends on both how much they cost and how easy they are to use/target/apply.

I get that you are very pro-nuclear, and it WOULD have lots of advantages were it done honestly and safely. Unfortunately there's a long history of management cost cutting on any safety measures they're allowed to. (This is not limited to private industry. ALL management. Look up the Hanford reactors.)

The advantage of solar in this area is that problems can be limited. I think more people have died doing solar installations that nuclear reactors have killed, and there's currently no good way to recycle solar cells, but the problems are more limited. (I'm not sure this is still true if you count the manufacture of the solar cells and their batteries, but I believe it is.)

Well, since it's pretty simple to generate methane, gas *could* get us away from fossil fuels. And since it's just there as a backup, it would definitely be *less* fossil fuels.

Of course, the problem is that we need negative amounts of CO2...and thermodynamics says that isn't going to be cheap.

Did neon insist that you got consent of the person that you were speaking to before the conversation was uploaded to neon ? I suspect not, so a huge privacy breach. I think illegal in Europe under the GDPR, I do not know about the USA which seems to be a wild west as far as data protection is concerned.

TFTFY.

The Internet was "messed up" before. Yeah, those cookie regulations are silly and obviously written by people overwhelmed with computers and digital networks, but fixing them would take 5 minutes and this bizarre cookie pop-up nonsense would vanish overnight.

Cross domain de-anonymizing tracking is prohibited.

There, fixed the law. No more pointless cookie bullshit.

As for the Internet: De-centralized crypto signed DNS as a replacement for the existing DNS. There, Internet fixed.

No necessarily. It often took many months for a Fortran IV programmer to adapt to structured programming. Habits can be hard to break.

Sorry, but thermodynamics is real. Entropy is real.

OTOH, some choices are more destructive than others. If you pay attention, you can pick the less destructive ones. (But we probably *are* beyond the carrying capacity of the planet for our species. This isn't a certainty, as there are many different approaches, but I believe we're past the carrying capacity using every approach that's been tried up until now. Including "pastoralist" and "hunter-gatherer".)

Or possibly what it means is that the segment of people who want that capability is small. (I would have been part of that segment a decade ago, when my eyes were better. These days Txt message on the phone are too small to read.)