They got impressed with the new guys, so they bought them out.

Their old employees were almost certainly good employees. Otherwise they would have fired them BEFORE the take over.

But after they bought out the new guys they thought that it would be stupid to buy new cow if old cow was good cow. So old cow must be bad cow. Sell old cow.

The truth is most likely that all the people involved EXCEPT the management are probably extremely competent. The management thought to save money in the place they were trying to spend money. That has to be the stupidest idea ever. If it was worth it to buy the company, then they needed all the smart people, including the old employees.

Why? Because there is the myth of the singular genius that invents the product. Science is not engineering. Engineering is not science. The AI 'inventors' are hiring engineers, not scientists. They are figuring out how to do something the scientists already have theorized is possible.

Any AI improvements will be done by a whole team of very qualified engineers doing the hard work of bringing the scientific ideas to reality. No one man - or group of men - is going to be that much better than other people. More smart people will however speed up the process.

Management was stupid. If hiring them was smart, then keeping their old employees was also smart.

No one else is likely to need this. But I can see celebrities wanting to stop all the shmucks from making AI videos of them.

He is talking about how when the chip was damaged, SanDisk managed to access the data.

If SanDisk has any brains at all, they will be advertising the hell out of this. Just copy the format for an old Timex watch:

"Takes an implosion and keeps on filming."

Same for the Rayfin Benthic subsea camera, though the destroyed lens and damaged PCBs makes it a harder sell.

As of July, yes.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wusf.org%2Ftext%2Fpoli...

But it mostly seems to be a huge abundance of slot machines, not card games. And yes, they do not always pay out if you win on these so called machines. And no regulation means no control over the odds, so they could simply not even let you win.

It appears to continue because of really gullible people, not all of them being senior citizens. You have to be incredibly trusting to believe a business running an unlicensed slot machine has any chance of 'winning' money.

That was the new rate. As in they figured this out 10 years ago, changed the advice 8 years ago and the death rate plummeted.

There has not been much written and discussed peanut allergies in at least 5 years because of how we solved most of the problem.

At the height of the problem there was an estimated 100 deaths from peanut allergies a year. https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhealth.howstuffworks.c...

I remember the first time I saw someone interrupt their video to show a short clip of something vaguely relevant that was much better than anything they did.

I was so pissed. I hate those things. It is the ultimate admission of your own stupidity - trying to do an in joke with strangers. Strangers! Worse, often they do it so poorly. OK, some people may like this crap, but not me.

Now AI is basically the same principal but worse - copying funny people because you think it makes you funny. No. real comedy requires timing and so much more, and AI does not have it. I hope it never does.

There has always been the good stuff, the people trying but failing to do the good stuff and the people who have no idea what good stuff is.

The reason people think X was better 10+ years ago is simple. You are comparing the absolute best stuff from all of history with the crap people put out this year. It's like comparing a random film today with the Oscar winners of the last 50 years. Of course the best of fifty years is going to be better than the best of this year.

That does not mean this year is crap - you have to wait for the oscars and compare the winners of this year with the winner of a single year 20 years ago.

Same thing with the internet. We forgot how much crap used to exist and only remember the good stuff. Now we have a lot more crap being put out. But don't compare the current crap with the award winners of yesteryear. Compare the best stuff of today with what came out 20 years ago and you see marked IMPROVEMENT over the past 20 years.

They did not pass a law. Someone came up with this question, thought, "Hey, I am not important enough to make this decision by myself, so lets ask everyone else that is part of our organization."

So the organization put out a vote to all the members. They voted and now the official position of this International organization is in favor of genetic engineering on wild species.

Now, the organization will lobby governments to make it legal.

You can do the same thing if you are part of some respected organization.

Lets say you are trying to save a near-extinct species. Say for example the Capitalist Republicanus. (These are pretty rare, because the current Republicanus King hates capitalism. He is a Mercantilist that likes tariffs, something Adam Smith hated so much, he created Capitalism.)

So there are only 150 C.Republicanus left, where there used to be millions of them. And of course, most of them are related to each other, as they all live in small communities. This has significantly reduced genetic diversity of the C. Republicanus. Many of them are susceptible to the same disease (Neverus Impeachus).

{Ending joke, real science to follow}

But lucky you, in museums there are several different taxidermy examples of the original specie left. They are old and not properly preserved, but it is possible to examine the skin cells of those stuffed animals. You can't get enough to clone them, but you CAN get about 30% of genetic code. Which you can compare to the living species.

Then you look for the genetic variants and see about 40-100 genes that used to exist in the species before the genetic bottle. You can create 50 different viri that inserts these old genes into the current species. You expose 50 different members of the current species, adding most of those old genes into the current members.

You are not cloning or creating new species, you are re-introducing real genetic diversity that used to exist but is no longer found.

This can make the species far more resilient and make the incestuous nature of the remaining species far less dangerous.

This is what the scientists want to do. They are adding diversity and preventing the problems of all the members currently being related to each other. It means one virus is less likely to kill the entire remaining species, and may fix other problems that come from inbreeding (see pure bred show dogs for the many, many problems that inbreeding causes).

Yes. They are using the Xe-100, tested in Germany.

Note, small, modular nuclear reactors have been thoroughly tested over the past 40 years. This is basically Nasa Readiness level 6/7 for quite a while. The technology has been delayed by fear, not engineering.

Diabetics have two different problems.
1) Too little sugar in their blood.
2) Too much sugar in their blood.

Too little sugar literally means you starve to death in minutes. It does not matter if you have 200 lbs of fat on your body, if the fat is not releasing the sugar into your blood, then your heart, lung, brains have nothing to eat and you die of starvation - even if you look over weight.

Solution is to monitor your blood sugar (either constantly with a Continuous Glucose Monitoring device inserted in your body all the time, or with a finger prick device). Then when the device says to, you eat something with sugar. Sugar pills are recommended, then high sugar liquids (Orange Juice is often recommended), but any source of sugar will save your life. If a diabetic suddenly falls unconscious you usually need to FEED them something just in case their sugar is low. Especially if they have not eaten recently. Unlike the tv shows usually giving them an insulin injection is not the save their life NOW thing to do.

Too much sugar is a longer term problem. It kills your kidneys. A large number of kidney transplants are caused by eating too much when you have diabetes. (Note, it can also work the other way around - the medication they give you for a kidney transplant can give you diabetes) So before a diabetic eats, you need to check your sugar. If it is high, you inject them with insulin and wait 15 minutes before you eat.

Note, this entire process is much harder because of four factors:

A) The symptoms you feel for having too much sugar in your body are almost identical for having too little sugar in your body. You really need to check it with a CGM or a finger prick device before treatment. But in an emergency unconcious giving sugar can save their life and will not kill them if they had too much.

B) Delay. Both eating and injecting insulin take time to affect your body. So it is quite possible to eat too much, resulting in you needing to then inject insulin an hour after you had emergence sugar. Similarly, 2 hours after injecting insulin you might have to eat if you injected too much.

C) Insulin needs to be kept refrigerated or it goes bad. So if you are going out, you should take an ice pack with the insulin.

D) American food system routinely provides way too much carbs. All carbs are the same as sugar, they rocket your blood sugar. If you are not diabetic your body can handle food fine. But the following is too many carbs: two slices of pizza. Hamburger (with bun) AND small french fries. One bagel. A Belgium waffle and hash browns. A stack of pancakes.

Making insulin cheap is very important because what it does is PREVENT KIDNEY TRANSPLANTS. If a diabetic does not use enough insulin, like I said earlier, it kills their kidneys. Then they ask for a transplant and we do not have enough.
So cheap insulin means fewer kidney transplants. And kidney transplants are FAR more expensive than paying for insulin - if only because the medication you need after one is more expensive than the insulin would be.

Cheap insulin = saves the state money.

Hybrids use generators rather than ICE. As such, they are more efficient burners of gasoline, reducing pollution per mile.

Here is an anysis of the Toyata RAV ICE vs Hybrid vs EV (done in 2023)

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmedium.com%2Fthe-new-cli...

The US has less electricity and less solar. We also have less Coal.

Trump has done a lot of damage, but the decentralized nature of power in the US means the states have ameliorated some of the damage.

The US is now carbon negative. It reached a max of 6 billion metric tons of CO2 in the 2000s. In 2025, we are putting out about 5 billion metric tons. That is a huge turn around.

China however has not turned it around. Sometime in the 2000s they hit our 6 billion and kept on going. They are now producing over 10 billion metric tons of CO2 each year - more than twice we do.

The US continues to be a major economy with a GDP over $30 trillion while China has a GDP of less than $20 trillion.

That's right we have a 50% larger economy while producing 50% as much CO2.

Internal Combustion Engines ARE more expensive to own.

They are cheap to make and cheap to sell. But maintenance and fuel costs are significantly higher. Especially in Norway.

Norway is powered almost entirely (over 95%) by hydroelectric dams. And they have little to no petroleum deposits. So electricity is far cheaper than gasoline/diesel.

As for maintenance, electric cars have far fewer moving parts. Basically the wheels. No movement = no wear and tear. You know those non-car people that ask don't change their oil until the car starts smoking? They can own an electric car without destroying it.

If Fox News agreed to it, then you would have a point. But even they did not.

I trust the experts when they say this is NOT similar to other things they sign. This goes above and beyond. It is not about access to information it is about agreeing to publish. They want people to only print what the government says to print. This is outright censorship.

I am wondering if you are simply not fully informed about what is being asked and are assuming that of course the administration would be reasonable.

Or you are informed and intentionally understating what is being asked in attempt to push public opinion.

This administration has gone so far beyond reason it is ridiculous. They have forbidden the journalists from asking questions from ANYONE in the pentagon. If you agree you can go in and only ask about the things they want to tell you about. If you do not agree you cannot go in and ask anyone anything.

This is not normal rules. If it were close to normal rules, Fox news would sign it and shine Trump's shoes.