did you argue the same when the Obama administration approved Keystone XL pipeline only to then unapprove it. Going so far as to veto a bill on the subject?

(https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20250309133053%2Fhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.rpc.senate.gov%2Fpolicy-papers%2Fbiden-resurrects-failed-obama-energy-strategy )

You may well have. But after reading about these kinds of things for decades and green tech and loggers vs owls (remember those?)
  overall no particular project is a hill worth dying on. Just try to position yourself to profit, or at least not lose too much money, on whatever it is and then ride the waves... it's not going to save/destroy the world one way or the other. And w/ your political speech cash support your PAC of choice.

btw, re owls... here's where we are now:

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pbs.org%2Fnewshour%2Fn...

i challenge you to cast this one in a "moral environmentalists" vs "evil corporates" or any such easy frame.

Do you actually believe this ? or, what chance do you think that this statement is true: "Pres. Trump banned off shore wind at Putin's behest in order to damage the United States" or maybe differentially w/ and w/o the "to damage the United States" part.

right so the capability is nearly fluff...
like flex fuel vehicles, remember those?

burning green hydrogen is even less cost effective than our seldom mentioned E85 push from like 20 years ago.
I'm still eagerly awaiting that enzymatic ethanol from grass that was right around the corner. instead of distilling corn.
(and of course holographic solid state memory with thousands year stability).

the issue with these power guys is that they're committing to pay for this hydrogen starting next year. not "when it's cost effective" or even "when it's less than 2x the cost of gas" or whatever.

Before WASM there was asm.js (https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FAsm.js) which is an efficient subset of js used as a target for "transpilers". Yes it's "code" is legal javascript, but it's not something people would actually write to.

as to TeaVM it describes itself well as:

As to why you'd want to use one... well maybe you want to package existing logic. Or you just want to write some complex stuff but not deal w/ the hell that is maintenance of a large JS project. and by "some complex stuff" i mean idk... like a game engine or a simulator or fancy graphics / video processing; not just a DHTML type app. And then you use the browser as a convenient distribution method / "zero footprint" scheme.

isn't all that revolutionary now that ng is relatively cheap.

and green hydrogen is still something of a mythical beast... where they're going to get it and how much it'll cost...
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nature.com%2Farticle...

And that's on top of how inefficient it is to generate electricity by burning any type of hydrogen. CA people will cry even more about our electricity bills.

TI, Intel and AMD have zero interest in selling their chips for this purpose. the number of chips used for this is a tiny fraction of their production.

Not even a rounding error.

And these are commodity chips sold all over the world which people can resell.

This is roughly like suing Toyota because various warlords around the world use Toyota trucks for their technicals.

uncalled for

The retraction note is all innuendo. It doesn't cure any actual wrongdoing, nor the actual basis of it's suspicions.
just that "questions have been raised".

The guardian article purports to quote smoking gun emails the closest that seems shady is from 2015 , 15 years later, where some Monsanto dude suggests ghostwriting a paper.

About the original paper it looks like normal corporate communication about a good event. There's no indication of saying anyone cheated or convinced scientists of untrue things or anything like that.

This overall seems more some sort of political purity declaration than about knowledge it even about scientific standards.

This is surprisingly on point. TFA ends with this:

and it may be true that the LLMs can't make paradigm shifting breakthroughs. But then ... how many people can? 0.1%? 1%? MAYBE 10%.

and the rest of people become no more ECONOMICALLY useful/competitive/viable than pets. Then what do we do ?

Which is to say that TFA may be right that LLMs aren't going to be AGI no matter what.... but they may yet totally upend (and possibly destroy) society.

Getting normal people to have / manage / distribute a key pair has been an ongoing / unsolved practical problem in just plain encryption/ authentication for like 35 years. The protocols have always supported it (or close enough to "always") but it just never took off.

Technically when you hit your bank's site in a browser, your browser COULD prompt you to present a client cert that you'd pre-registered with the bank and not even let you connect otherwise. And it's been able to do that as long as HTTPS has existed.... but it never took off for that use for whatever reason.

Military and some enterprise users have used the stuff for decades, primarily via smart-cards. (and yubikeys / fobs)
Devs finally started using some keys en masse when git and remote dev became popular.

But for straight up normal people? it's still an ongoing challenge.

The newish attempt is "passworldess" via "passkeys" (https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdevelopers.google.com%2Fidentity%2Fpasskeys%2F ) which are PKI under the covers, and quite neat. but ... kinda don't actually address the backup / long term loss of access aspect either unless you basically use a password manager like program/service AND back it up securely. AND don't lose the password (or biometric access ) to your password manager or its backup.

And yet that's exactly what they decided to do on the re-run / moving forward... as mentioned in both TFS and TFA:

Mmmm... Flint's water had extra lead for only ~1.5 years because they changed their source of water and unknowingly got rid of a corrosion inhibitor.
(https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pbs.org%2Fnewshour%2Fscience%2Fstudy-confirms-lead-got-flints-water)

it's not some permanent issue, though replacing lead pipes is still a good idea and it's ongoing.

Heh. i assume you mean "faster". Still it's an accomplishment to be competitive for a first foray into the market. (of wifi / BT chips).

That said.... i'm pretty skeptical of the methodology here. reading the ookla article this really IS only based on end-to-end speed tests. There's splits by market (continent) and some talk of Wifi7 vs not. But there's no talk of any other controls like for type of internet access, type of access points , etc... presumably because none of that info is available.

They made no statements afaict as to why one would believe iPhone 16 and iPhone17 users are functionally similar in those regards. It seems at least reasonable to me to suspect that the people who sprung for the new $1000 phones in their first month would also be more likely to have faster internet service and better routers...

Robot Chicken thought similarly...

(beached whale)
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3F...

that's not it in this case. it's that without standardized tests they really on GPA more heavily
and recruited heavily from lower performance high schools where they have so much grade inflation/ low standards that even some people with
a 3.5 GPA there are functionally illiterate and innumerate.

that's the long and the short of it.