The AI industry calling for regulation is a better sham still. They know the regulation will be toothless, there is nothing for them to fear. But if the "regulation" materializes, they can deflect any liability for the sizable damage they cause by pointing out they follow regulation.

Related are the calls to get public oversight in the form of part government ownership. Which is a ploy to sell their inflated stock to taxpayer suckers, to get the government on the leash to pave the way for them with all of their problems, and to get a guarantee of government bailout if things get sour.

Beautiful in it's own right, but oh so cynical and evil. Get with the times, I guess.

In fact, there is a lot wrong with Democrats. If there was nothing wrong with them, no one would be voting Trump over Democrats.

Leaving aside bipartisan issues like corruption, lies, and incompetence... Where Democrats fall behind Republicans these days is that Democrats consider party discipline more important than election results, or even any results at all. Republicans took note that Trump was making waves, understood that the wind was changing, and they remade the Party in his image to get ahead. Democrats on the other hand cut the head off of anyone who threatens the status quo of power in the party, and are then left wondering where they should get themselves a Democrat Musk or Rogan... you already had those, but you could not forgive them they had a few of their own ideas about things too, and you threw them away and turned them against you!

This is why Democrats are left fielding unelectable mediocrity like Clinton and Harris, and of course Biden, who only won the first time because Trump had made such a joke of himself. By enforcing rightthink in the party lines without exception, everything that can draw and keep voter attention is bred out of the Democrat bloodline. Bernie, betrayed. AOC, of borg by now. Mamdani, in progress. Platner, destroyed. By the time anyone can get nominated, they have already for years had the charisma of drying paint, and vision to match. The bloodline by now is of late stage Habsburg quality, with results to show for it. Came Trump second time, even the joke that he is was still beat the joke that was the Democrat campaign. Not only that, Democrats have lost the ability to govern and are basically imploding by now, only making half-hearted noise about issues, but folding every hand without any actual fight. Pity.

Next he will be renaming the United States of America to America of America. Or maybe straight to Trump America.

So "not that different" translates to "less than half" by the time you finished the paragraph?

Did you miss the phrase "raw bulb efficiencies", or were you under the impression that streetlamps are raw bulbs and nothing more?

Now that the term "super intelligence" doesn't have a distinguishing meaning anymore, we will have to find a different phrase to refer to AI that both qualifies as intelligent and further that qualifies as having intelligence beyond that of humans.

Something like...I don't know....Ultrahuman intelligence. It is less ambiguous than ultra-intelligence but is unfortunately long.

Oh well. I am sure you guys can come up with more alternatives.

So the answer is: If you want to sell a product that contains fresh peeled bananas, don't expose them to oxygen. Fill the packaging with nitrogen, as is done for potato chips to slow down the oil from going rancid.

You're talking about PEPC uptake of bicarbonate and CO2 in soil moisture. It's only like 1-2%, and it's not "soil carbon", it's CO2 from the atmosphere dissolved in water. Same uptake whether the soil is humus-rich or bare sand.

How do you plan to handle achieving 1000W/m2 of lighting *before* losses?

I think realistically you'd need orbital mirrors for that.

Also, someone keeps stealing my water. I'll leave a glass of water out overnight, and the next time I check it, it's lower. I swear I'm not making it up, it's happened multiple times.

The funny thing is there's not that much difference in the raw bulb efficiencies - LPS is slightly lower, but not dramatically. But LPS have more fixture losses (the bulbs are omnidirectional), ballast losses, inefficient dimming (and only to slight degrees) for morning/evening, and so on. LED's high CRI (vs. LPS's virtually nonexistent CRI) can sometimes mean you can use less light, too. In practice, you can use something like 30-40% the electricity with LED streetlamps as with LPS, despite the raw bulb figures not being very different.

But no question that LED is much worse for astronomy. LPS was almost a pure spectral line, very easy to exclude. White LEDs use phosphors and deliver a broad spectrum white (apart from the source's blue peak). Pretty much the worst spectrum you could have apart from incandescent. : It kind of sucks that we have to use phosphors in the first place, as they're wasteful - but unfortunately, LEDs have a "green gap"; in the green spectrum, existing tech has a dramatic drop in output and efficiency (and corresponding increase in price) - while green is what our eyes see best. There's still ongoing work to fill it, but it's been a slog. If we could skip the phosphor and just have a mix of different coloured LEDs, the fixtures would be even more efficient, and it would be much easier for astronomers to filter (esp. if the frequencies were standardized)

GPT-6 Astra, however, did eventually learn to navigate the course and complete it. But not without a lot of troubleshooting.

No different than when people first learn to drive. Beween learning how to shift gears while not stalling the car, how much to accelerate, how much to turn the steering wheel, when to turn the steering, and so on, people first learning to drive require a lot of troubleshooting. Each time improves the quality of driving (you hope).

that benefit will never happen

You know that arctic apples and innate potatoes both use the exact same PPO silencing tech, and have been on the market for years? Innate potatoes also contain less asparagine, the amino acid that turns into the carcinogen acrylamide when frying.

Do also remember that while these are "GMO", they're not transgenic. They simply have genes shut off - no new genes.

It is not "purely cosmetic in commercial situations". Bananas are one of the most wasted food products on the planet. You very much should care about reducing that. And bananas have largely been locked out of the ready-to-eat market by PPO-related browning because they turn to brown sludge unless you ruin their texture/flavour by treating them in citric/ascorbic acid or sulfur dioxide.

And once again, this has nothing to do with whether the bananas are old or not. Browning is an entirely different process than ripening. PPO vs. ethylene. Entirely different physiological responses. Get rid of PPO, and it still continues the normal aging process - pectin methylesterases and cellulases still break down the cell walls, amylase still converts starches to sugars (which then slowly ferment if given enough time), etc. No impact to normal aging. The impact is to rapid spoilage after peeling.

I mean, apples do last longer than most other produce?

(Though winter squash, it's hard to beat them!)

Once again, for the love of God, read and understand the article: this is NOT ABOUT WHETHER THE BANANAS ARE OLD OR NOT. It's NOT ABOUT WHETHER THEY'RE RIPE OR NOT. It's about THE BROWNING THAT HAPPENS WITHIN HOURS OF YOU REMOVING THE PEEL. Caused by an enzyme in bananas that is generally harmful to the human diet anyway (degrades vitamin C and polyphenols and reduces protein digestibility).