In most cases the users already benefit off of the data they generate by getting "free" products, e.g., Google search, gmail, etc. Getting paid for the data directly in cash (?) means those products won't be free anymore. What's the difference then besides making the user experience more complicated?

The battery's value comes from its short response on the time scale of milliseconds. Conventional power plants are mechanical systems, and because of that it would take orders of magnitude more time to start them up for backup power generation. For that reason, at all times, coal power plants generate a little bit more power than there's demand for. If some other power plant trips, the frequency drop is detected, and the surplus kinetic energy of the turbine is immediately transmitted to the grid to stabilize the supply. However, there's the cost. The power plant has to generate surplus power at all times just because it can't change its state fast enough in case of emergency. The battery technology, with its response times typical for chemical/solid state systems, slashes the cost of conventional power generation by making this surplus backup power unnecessary.

The article is silent about vectorization, and Intel invests a lot in that lately. Do we know anything about the compilation flags of that copy of cinebench? If not, the assessment could be extremely unfair. A newer set of vectorization instructions corresponds to a longer vector size for arithmetic operations that can be carried out concurrently. For example, in HPC applications, enabling the highest available level of AVX can lead to 2x gains compared to code compiled for legacy systems.

Probably that's how it's done by Google. You just described the training stage of generative adversarial networks.

The claim about low wage misrepresents the reality. "Tesla also offers equity to all employees from the ground up through their stock program." The guy failed to mention that. See https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Felectrek.co%2F2017%2F02%2F09...

Can anybody explain why creating US jobs is at the absolute top of the agenda? (I'm not trolling.) With the unemployment rate at 4.8%, you won't get any lower. It's the absolute minimum not only according to Fed, but as a result of the universal laws of free market. For example, there's a contribution to the unemployment rate from those who switch from one job to another right at the moment of the measurement. So what's the problem? (My guess: the unemployment is low, but the jobs available for US citizens are shitty.) Note: I'm an EU citizen; I don't work nor stay in the US.

Well, every word has its origin, and the origin of the word "autopilot" is in the aviation industry. So, really, I can't understand why people began to think "autopilot" is equivalent to something like "robo-pilot" or whatever else they imagine.

The name "autopilot" isn't confusing at all if you think of it as an analogue of the autopilot in a commercial airplane. The airplane autopilot isn't fully autonomic either; for example, it can't take off on its own. Even at the cruising altitude it requires full attention of the pilots: http://www.cnbc.com/2015/03/26...

Google Trends normalizes against the total volume of search traffic; the graph says what *percentage* of searches were made for this word. Almost every topic is 'losing traffic' because people are searching for more things on the web.

Many myths here.

http://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm

http://skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm

http://skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm
http://skepticalscience.com/solar-cycles-global-warming.htm