Comment Re:Oh goody (Score 1) 75
Which means I'd have a million dollars and therefore I would in fact be a 'millionaire'. Duh.
Comment Re: Why would you give a loan...? (Score 1) 75
Everyone gets paid (if all goes well).
And (just out of curiosity) what if it doesn't?
I mean, not that it would ever happen of course (because crypto is incredibly super stable), but what if the Magical Money Fairy has a little boo-boo and falls down? Does everyone still get paid?
Comment Re:Oh goody (Score 1) 75
At this point in time it's more like White Swan event.
Comment Re:Oh goody (Score 1) 75
I too laughed at that when I read it.
"All I need to do is double my net worth every day for a month..."
Comment I can't believe it (Score 1) 75
Wow, I can't believe that some highly speculative, crypto-coin-adjacent business scheme with the word "Infinite" in the name has crashed.
Submission + - 100 years on, quantum mechanics is redefining reality—with us at the cente (science.org)
sciencehabit writes: Standing in a garden on the remote German island of Helgoland one day in June, two theoretical physicists quibble over who—or what—constructs reality. Carlo Rovelli, based at Aix-Marseille University, insists he is real with respect to a stone on the ground. He may cast a shadow on the stone, for instance, projecting his existence onto their relationship. Chris Fuchs of the University of Massachusetts Boston retorts that it’s preposterous to imagine the stone possessing any worldview, seeing as it is a stone. Although allied in their belief that reality is subjective rather than absolute, they both leave the impromptu debate unsatisfied, disagreeing about whether they agree.
Such is the state of theoretical quantum mechanics, scientists’ deepest description of the atomic world. The theory was developed 100 years ago on Helgoland, where a 23-year-old Werner Heisenberg retreated to escape a bout of hay fever—and to reimagine what an atom looks like. The leading picture at the time featured electrons hopping in discrete, or quantized, leaps of energy between fixed orbits around the nucleus. It explained the behavior of hydrogen but failed for bigger atoms. On blustery walks and cold swims in the North Sea, Heisenberg abandoned the simplistic orbital picture, instead developing a new mathematical language that would work for any atom. Later in 1925, Erwin Schrödinger conjured up a complementary lens—his eponymous wave equation—which describes the positions of electrons in probabilistic terms.
Within a few years, their calculations would reveal a disturbingly fuzzy picture of reality, one in which certain properties are inherently unknowable and others take on different values depending on how they’re measured. “What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning,” Heisenberg wrote after winning the 1932 Nobel Prize in Physics.
This year, hundreds of physicists convened on Helgoland to commemorate the birth of quantum mechanics. It has certainly earned its keep over the past century, not only by predicting experimental outcomes with immaculate precision, but also by enabling technologies such as lasers, transistors, and atomic clocks. Yet even today, scientists struggle to interpret what the theory implies about nature. Central to the confusion is how the act of measurement pins down the indeterminate behavior of atoms. The standard framing has an unsettling anthropocentric flavor, suggesting humans play some special role in shaping the universe. Now, bolstered by a string of recent experiments, theorists such as Fuchs and Rovelli are leaning into the discomfort, emphasizing how observers do indeed create the world they inhabit. What’s at stake is nothing less than reality itself.
“We don’t need to fix quantum mechanics to make it compatible with what we observe; we need to recognize that there are alternative ways of looking at the world,” says Alyssa Ney, a philosopher of physics at the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich. Quantum theory compels physicists to “make room for different notions of what it means to be real.”
Such is the state of theoretical quantum mechanics, scientists’ deepest description of the atomic world. The theory was developed 100 years ago on Helgoland, where a 23-year-old Werner Heisenberg retreated to escape a bout of hay fever—and to reimagine what an atom looks like. The leading picture at the time featured electrons hopping in discrete, or quantized, leaps of energy between fixed orbits around the nucleus. It explained the behavior of hydrogen but failed for bigger atoms. On blustery walks and cold swims in the North Sea, Heisenberg abandoned the simplistic orbital picture, instead developing a new mathematical language that would work for any atom. Later in 1925, Erwin Schrödinger conjured up a complementary lens—his eponymous wave equation—which describes the positions of electrons in probabilistic terms.
Within a few years, their calculations would reveal a disturbingly fuzzy picture of reality, one in which certain properties are inherently unknowable and others take on different values depending on how they’re measured. “What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning,” Heisenberg wrote after winning the 1932 Nobel Prize in Physics.
This year, hundreds of physicists convened on Helgoland to commemorate the birth of quantum mechanics. It has certainly earned its keep over the past century, not only by predicting experimental outcomes with immaculate precision, but also by enabling technologies such as lasers, transistors, and atomic clocks. Yet even today, scientists struggle to interpret what the theory implies about nature. Central to the confusion is how the act of measurement pins down the indeterminate behavior of atoms. The standard framing has an unsettling anthropocentric flavor, suggesting humans play some special role in shaping the universe. Now, bolstered by a string of recent experiments, theorists such as Fuchs and Rovelli are leaning into the discomfort, emphasizing how observers do indeed create the world they inhabit. What’s at stake is nothing less than reality itself.
“We don’t need to fix quantum mechanics to make it compatible with what we observe; we need to recognize that there are alternative ways of looking at the world,” says Alyssa Ney, a philosopher of physics at the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich. Quantum theory compels physicists to “make room for different notions of what it means to be real.”
Submission + - "Slop" may be seeping into the nooks and crannies of our brains. (gizmodo.com)
joshuark writes: Gizmodo reports that: Evidence That Humans Now Speak in a Chatbot-Influenced Dialect Is Getting Stronger. In theory, all organically grown utterances and snippets of text are safe from that label. But our shared linguistic ecosystem may be so AI-saturated, we now all sound like AI. Worse, in some cases AI-infected speech is being spouted by (ostensibly human) elected officials.
But two new, more anecdotal reports, suggest that our chatbot dialect isn’t just something that can be found through close analysis of data. It might be an obvious, every day fact of life now.
One can state pretty categorically, however, that the sign is written in a new style of annoying prose that has only existed since the release of ChatGPT. And at least some of that annoying new style may be embedded in all of our brains now whether we like it or not. The trend started with the infamous ELIZA.BAS BASIC program [https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.atariarchives.org%2Fbcc3%2Fshowpage.php%3Fpage%3D251] a friend programmed into their Atari 800XL home computer.
But two new, more anecdotal reports, suggest that our chatbot dialect isn’t just something that can be found through close analysis of data. It might be an obvious, every day fact of life now.
One can state pretty categorically, however, that the sign is written in a new style of annoying prose that has only existed since the release of ChatGPT. And at least some of that annoying new style may be embedded in all of our brains now whether we like it or not. The trend started with the infamous ELIZA.BAS BASIC program [https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.atariarchives.org%2Fbcc3%2Fshowpage.php%3Fpage%3D251] a friend programmed into their Atari 800XL home computer.
Submission + - The story behind the first handheld digital camera (bbc.com)
sinij writes:
In 1975, a young engineer in the company that made Kodak film took the first picture on a handheld digital camera. Photography would never be the same again.
Submission + - Northern Lights may be visible in nearly 2 dozen states Monday night. (weather.com)
dresgarcia writes: Apparently NOAA is predicting a strong geomagnetic storm following a solar flare that occurred on the 6th. They are predicting that this will allow the aurora to be seen much farther south than usual.
"In a special alert issued on Sunday, a forecast from NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center predicted a strong G3 geomagnetic storm through midday Tuesday, December 9.
While space weather is hard to predict, auroras could be visible from late Monday night into the wee hours of Tuesday morning and possibly again on Tuesday night.
According to NOAA, here’s where they may be visible: Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine."
"In a special alert issued on Sunday, a forecast from NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center predicted a strong G3 geomagnetic storm through midday Tuesday, December 9.
While space weather is hard to predict, auroras could be visible from late Monday night into the wee hours of Tuesday morning and possibly again on Tuesday night.
According to NOAA, here’s where they may be visible: Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine."
Submission + - The Escalating AI Chip War: Hyperscalers Mount a Challenge to Nvidia's Crown (buysellram.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Google is making its proprietary TPUs (Ironwood) available to Meta, directly challenging Nvidia’s 90% dominance. The massive cost of AI compute is forcing tech giants to turn from Nvidia's biggest customers into its fiercest competitors. This strategic shift will wipe out $150B in market value and signals the end of a near-unbreakable monopoly. Can Nvidia's software moat (CUDA) hold up against the combined might of hyperscalers?
Submission + - Old'n'busted: vibe-codin'. New hotness: vibe-talkin' (gizmodo.com)
Mr. Dollar Ton writes: Our shared linguistic ecosystem may be so polluted by AI slop that some now sound like AI. Worse, in some cases AI-infected speech is being spouted by (ostensibly human) elected officials.
Submission + - London councils gripped by cyber attacks
An anonymous reader writes: NCC supporting London councils gripped by cyber attacks
“Three Greater London councils struck by a cyber attack last week are receiving response support from cyber security experts at NCC Group as they continue to pursue multiple investigations into the incident.”
“Three Greater London councils struck by a cyber attack last week are receiving response support from cyber security experts at NCC Group as they continue to pursue multiple investigations into the incident.”
Submission + - Applets Are Officially Gone, But Java In The Browser Is Better Than Ever (frequal.com)
AirHog writes: (From the full story at https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffrequal.com%2Fjava%2FApple...)
Applets are officially, completely removed from Java 26, coming in March of 2026. This brings to an official end the era of applets, which began in 1996. However, for years it has been possible to build modern, interactive web pages in Java without needing applets or plugins. TeaVM (https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fteavm.org) provides fast, performant, and lightweight tooling to transpile Java to run natively in the browser. And for a full front-end toolkit with templates, routing, components, and more, Flavour (https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fflavour.sf.net) lets you build your modern single-page app using 100% Java.
Applets are officially, completely removed from Java 26, coming in March of 2026. This brings to an official end the era of applets, which began in 1996. However, for years it has been possible to build modern, interactive web pages in Java without needing applets or plugins. TeaVM (https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fteavm.org) provides fast, performant, and lightweight tooling to transpile Java to run natively in the browser. And for a full front-end toolkit with templates, routing, components, and more, Flavour (https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fflavour.sf.net) lets you build your modern single-page app using 100% Java.
Submission + - AI Agents Casually Rob $4.6 Million (In Simulation), Cost $3,476 To Run (anthropic.com)
weiyeh writes: Remember when we worried about script kiddies? Meet their AI-powered, profit-optimizing successors. Researchers from Anthropic and the MATS program have released SCONE-bench, a benchmark showing that AI agents can now autonomously exploit blockchain smart contracts—and they're getting scary good at it. From the research report:
"On contracts exploited after March 2025 (beyond the models' training data), Claude Opus 4.5, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and GPT-5 developed working exploits worth a collective $4.6 million in simulated stolen funds. The top performer, Opus 4.5, successfully compromised 50% of these contracts."
"On contracts exploited after March 2025 (beyond the models' training data), Claude Opus 4.5, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and GPT-5 developed working exploits worth a collective $4.6 million in simulated stolen funds. The top performer, Opus 4.5, successfully compromised 50% of these contracts."
Submission + - Fish-inspired filter removes 99% of microplastics from washing machine wastewate (techxplore.com)
schwit1 writes: Some fish feed by means of filtration; these include, for example, mackerel, sardines, and anchovies. They swim through the water with their mouths open and sift out the plankton with their gill arch system. "We took a closer look at the construction of this system and used it as the model for developing a filter that can be used in washing machines," says Blanke, who is a member of the transdisciplinary research areas Life & Health and Sustainable Futures at the University of Bonn.
During their evolution, these fish have developed a technique similar to cross-flow filtration. Their gill arch system is shaped like a funnel that is widest at the fish's mouth and tapers towards their gullet. The walls of the funnel are shaped by the branchial arches. These feature comb-like structures, the arches, which are themselves covered in small teeth. This creates a kind of mesh that is stretched by the branchial arches.
The filter element in the center imitates the gill arch system of the fish. The filter housing enables periodic cleaning and installation in washing machines.
"During food intake, the water flows through the permeable funnel wall, is filtered, and the particle-free water is then released back into the environment via the gills," explains Blanke. "However, the plankton is too big for this; it is held back by the natural sieve structure. Thanks to the funnel shape, it then rolls toward the gullet, where it is collected until the fish swallows, which empties and cleans the system."
This principle prevents the filter from being blocked—instead of hitting the filter head-on, the fibers roll along it toward the gullet. The process is also highly effective, as it removes almost all of the plankton from the water. Both are aspects that a microplastic filter must also be able to deliver. The researchers thus replicated the gill arch system. In doing so, they varied both the mesh size of the sieve structure and the opening angle of the funnel.
"We have thus found a combination of parameters that enable our filter to separate more than 99% of the microplastics out of the water but not become blocked," says Hamann. To achieve this, the team used not only experiments but also computer simulations. The filter modeled on nature does not contain any elaborate mechanics and should thus be very inexpensive to manufacture.
The microplastics that it filters out of the washing water collect in the filter outlet and are then suctioned away several times a minute. According to the researcher, who has now moved to the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, they could then, for example, be pressed in the machine to remove the remaining water. The plastic pellet created in this manner could then be removed every few dozen washes and disposed of with general waste.
During their evolution, these fish have developed a technique similar to cross-flow filtration. Their gill arch system is shaped like a funnel that is widest at the fish's mouth and tapers towards their gullet. The walls of the funnel are shaped by the branchial arches. These feature comb-like structures, the arches, which are themselves covered in small teeth. This creates a kind of mesh that is stretched by the branchial arches.
The filter element in the center imitates the gill arch system of the fish. The filter housing enables periodic cleaning and installation in washing machines.
"During food intake, the water flows through the permeable funnel wall, is filtered, and the particle-free water is then released back into the environment via the gills," explains Blanke. "However, the plankton is too big for this; it is held back by the natural sieve structure. Thanks to the funnel shape, it then rolls toward the gullet, where it is collected until the fish swallows, which empties and cleans the system."
This principle prevents the filter from being blocked—instead of hitting the filter head-on, the fibers roll along it toward the gullet. The process is also highly effective, as it removes almost all of the plankton from the water. Both are aspects that a microplastic filter must also be able to deliver. The researchers thus replicated the gill arch system. In doing so, they varied both the mesh size of the sieve structure and the opening angle of the funnel.
"We have thus found a combination of parameters that enable our filter to separate more than 99% of the microplastics out of the water but not become blocked," says Hamann. To achieve this, the team used not only experiments but also computer simulations. The filter modeled on nature does not contain any elaborate mechanics and should thus be very inexpensive to manufacture.
The microplastics that it filters out of the washing water collect in the filter outlet and are then suctioned away several times a minute. According to the researcher, who has now moved to the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, they could then, for example, be pressed in the machine to remove the remaining water. The plastic pellet created in this manner could then be removed every few dozen washes and disposed of with general waste.
Slashdot Top Deals
You're at Witt's End.
