ArbitraryValue Now • 100%
Israel had time to get its jets into the air so I wouldn't be too surprised if evacuated hangars were not a high priority for the missile defense system.
ArbitraryValue Now • 20%
I disagree with you, because a modern human could offer the people of the distant past (with their far less advanced technology) solutions to their problems which would seem miraculous to them. Things that they thought were impossible would be easy for the modern human. The computer may do the same for us, with a solution to climate change that would be, as you put it, magically ecological.
With that said, the computer wouldn't be giving humans suggestions. It would be the one in charge. Imagine a group of chimpanzees that somehow create a modern human. (Not a naked guy with nothing, but rather someone with all the knowledge we have now.) That human isn't going to limit himself to answering questions for very long. This isn't a perfect analogy because chimpanzees don't comprehend language, but if a human with a brain just 3.5 times the size of a chimpanzee's can do so much more than a chimpanzee, a computer with calculational capability orders of magnitude greater than a human's could be a god compared to us. (The critical thing is to make it a loving god; humans haven't been good to chimpanzees.)
ArbitraryValue Now • 88%
I don't think you're imagining the same thing they are when you hear the word "AI". They're not imagining a computer that prints out a new idea that is about as good as the ideas that humans have come up with. Even that would be amazing (it would mean that a computer could do science and engineering about as well as a human) but they're imagining a computer that's better than any human. Better at everything. It would be the end of the world as we know it, and perhaps the start of something much better. In any case, climate change wouldn't be our problem anymore.
ArbitraryValue Now • 100%
The article compares coal and natural gas based on thermal energy and does not take into account the greater efficiency of natural-gas power plants. According to Yale the efficiency of a coal power plant is 32% and that of a natural gas power plant is 44%. This means that to generate the same amount of electricity, you need 38% more thermal energy from coal than you would from natural gas. I'm surprised that the author neglects this given his focus on performing a full lifecycle assessment.
Natural gas becomes approximately equal to coal after efficiency is corrected for, using the author's GWP20 approach. GWP20 means that the effect of global warming is calculated for a 20 year timescale. The author argues that this is the appropriate timescale to use, but he also presents data for the more conventional GWP100 approach, and when this data is adjusted for efficiency, coal is about 25% worse than natural gas.
I'm not an expert so I can't speak authoritatively about GWP20 vs GWP100 but I suspect GWP100 is more appropriate in this case. Carbon dioxide is a stable gas but methane degrades fairly quickly. Its lifetime in the atmosphere is approximately 10 years. This means that while a molecule of carbon dioxide can keep trapping heat forever, a molecule of methane will trap only a finite amount of heat. This effect is underestimated using GWP20.
Edit: Also the Guardian shouldn't be calling this a "major study". It's one guy doing some fairly basic math and publishing in a journal that isn't particularly prestigious.
ArbitraryValue Now • 100%
You could. This type of gun is not intended primarily for use against people (although this particular gun might be modified to serve the role of a sniper rifle). It's for shooting aircraft and lightly armored vehicles. By that I don't mean cars; I mean armored personnel carriers. The bullets would go right through a building's walls.
I can't quickly find a photo of this gun's 12.7 mm bullet doing its thing, but here's what the very similar American 50 cal bullet does to six-inch-thick concrete:
ArbitraryValue Now • 100%
What worked on my friend (in other words, what pissed my friend off) was saying "Why don't you..." and then proposing something other than what he was doing, with bonus points for proposing an idea that came to mind there and then without thinking about it much.
ArbitraryValue Now • 100%
My guess is that they didn't answer your question because they had strict instructions not to stray from the script on this topic. Saying the wrong thing could lead to a big PR problem, so I don't expect that people working in this field would be willing to have a candid public discussion even about topics to which they have given a lot of thought. I do expect that they have given the ability of AI to obey orders accurately a lot of thought at least due to practical (if not ethical) concerns.
I mean, I am currently willing to say "the AIs will almost definitely kill civilians but we should build them anyway" because I don't work in defense. However, even I'm a little nervous saying that because one day I might want to. My friends who do work in defense have told me that the people who gave them clearance did investigate their online presence. (My background is in computational biochemistry but I look at what's going on in AI and I feel like nothing else is important in comparison.)
As for cold comfort: I think autonomous weapons are inevitable in the same way that the atom bomb was inevitable. Even if no one wants to see it used, everyone wants to have it because enemies will. However, I don't see a present need for strategic (as opposed to tactical) automation. A computer would have an advantage in battlefield control but strategy takes hours or days or years and so a human's more reliable ability to reason would be more important in that domain.
Once a computer can reason better than a human can, that's the end of the world as we know it. It's also inevitable like the atom bomb.
ArbitraryValue Now • 6%
The federal government uses the term "terminate" rather than "revoke" to describe the decision not to extend TPS, but even the article the OP posted (which is very critical of Trump's plan) interprets what he said as "not extend".
Now Trump plans to forcibly uproot this group of roughly 18,000 people who pay taxes, own homes, have jobs, and support their families. But that’s only the beginning: Up to 2.7 million people could lose protection from deportation if Trump allows immigration programs such as Temporary Protected Status, DACA, and humanitarian parole to lapse during a second term, according to Forbes.
ArbitraryValue Now • 17%
The interviewer was the one who used the word "revoke" but Trump does seem like the kind of person who could attempt to end the TPS designation early rather than waiting for it to simply expire a year into his term. Such an attempt would have very little chance of success. Decisions to terminate (as opposed to revoke early) TPS status during Trump's past presidency are still going through the courts (see Ramos, et al. v. Nielsen, et al.) and not in effect.
ArbitraryValue Now • 17%
Trump and the interviewer are talking about Temporary Protected Status, which is temporary.
A TPS designation can be made for 6, 12, or 18 months at a time. At least 60 days prior to the expiration of TPS, the Secretary [of Homeland Security] must decide whether to extend or terminate a designation based on the conditions in the foreign country.
TPS eligibility for people from Haiti will last until February 3, 2026 unless it is extended. If during a Trump presidency, the federal government does not extend TPS for Haiti, it would be acting well within its established authority.
ArbitraryValue Now • 90%
The essence of the message itself is simple: Warning, dangerous materials are buried below.
The warnings will be heeded about as much as the curses in ancient Egyptian tombs were.
Still others advised against erecting any warning monuments at all, worrying that the markers themselves— if not properly interpreted— may rouse the curiosity of their discoverers enough that they might explore further, to disastrous ends.
The best idea, IMO.
ArbitraryValue Now • 66%
I'm not saying they aren't intended to be used in combat. Of course they (or more sophisticated future robots for which they are the prototypes) are. I'm saying that they're not being used in combat right now.
ArbitraryValue Now • 50%
a full-scale total war in the middle east, possibly even beyond that
Who else would enter the war on Iran's side? It doesn't have any powerful allies among the other Middle Eastern countries, which rightly perceive it as an ideological rival and a would-be regional hegemon, and its proxies appear to be doing as much as they can already.
I think Iran is vulnerable because it overplayed its hand. Thus a war now may be better than dealing with Iran as a nuclear power later.
ArbitraryValue Now • 85%
Despite media speculation, Israel is not currently planning to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, according to four Israeli officials, even though Israel sees Iran’s efforts to create a nuclear weapons program as an existential threat. Targeting nuclear sites, many of which are deep underground, would be hard without U.S. support. President Biden said Wednesday that he would not support an attack by Israel on Iranian nuclear sites.
I wonder what the strategy here is, given that the USA also wants to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons. Is the implication here that the USA will not enable an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities as long as Iran doesn't actually try to build a bomb? How confident are Israel and the USA that Iran can't build a bomb in secret? Is there a way Iran could retaliate against an attack on its nuclear facilities but not against an attack on other major targets?
ArbitraryValue Now • 66%
That and the following make me suspect that this is a faked publicity stunt rather than a real prototype.
“The purpose of building this tool is not for misuse, and we are not releasing it,” Nguyen and Ardafiyo write in a document explaining the project. Instead, the students say their goal is to raise awareness that all this isn’t some dystopian future — it’s all possible now with existing technology.
ArbitraryValue Now • 100%
PimEyes doesn't search Facebook. You can try it for yourself. It will show you matching faces for free, but you have to pay to find out where it found them.
ArbitraryValue Now • 30%
a Ghost Robotics Vision 60 Quadrupedal-Unmanned Ground Vehicle, or Q-UGV, armed with what appears to be an AR-15/M16-pattern rifle on rotating turret undergoing "rehearsals" at the Red Sands Integrated Experimentation Center in Saudi Arabia
They're not being used in combat.
With that aside, I appear to be the only one here who thinks this is a great idea. AI can make mistakes, but the goal isn't perfection. It's just to make fewer mistakes than a human soldier does. (Or at least fewer mistakes than a bomb does, which is really easy.)
Plus, automation can address the problem Western countries have with unconventional warfare, which is that Western armies are much less willing to have soldiers die than their opponents are. Sufficiently determined guerrillas who can tolerate high losses can inflict slow but steady losses on Western armies until the Western will to fight is exhausted. If robots can take the place of human infantry, the advantage shifts back from guerrillas to countries with high-tech manufacturing capability.
ArbitraryValue Now • 100%
I have not come across facial recognition software that contains Facebook pictures in its database. I don't mean to be creepy, but I'm curious about which software you're referring to.
ArbitraryValue Now • 100%
Wow, I think that's a modified DShK, which entered service in 1938. It's not a museum piece - these guns are still in widespread use.
ArbitraryValue Now • 100%
You can plug the body back on for the next time.
What do you mean? Are you reconnecting two halves of a cut tube of toothpaste somehow?
[Archive link.](https://archive.is/FXIV4#selection-4703.0-4703.69) >As recently as February, Mr. Walz said on a podcast that he had been in Hong Kong, then a British colony, “on June 4 when Tiananmen happened,” and decided to cross into mainland China to take up his teaching duties even though many people were urging him not to. >But it was not true. Mr. Walz, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, indeed taught at a high school in China as part of a program sending American teachers abroad, but he did not actually travel to the country until August 1989. Why bother making something like this up?
Pretty much every major shopping website has terrible search functionality. I usually want something very specific, for example `60w dimmable e12 frosted warm led bulb`. I have not found a single shopping website that won't show me results without many of these terms in the description. I don't want to see listings that say `40w` and don't say `60w` anywhere, and it isn't hard to filter them out! Are these shopping websites bad on purpose? What's in it for them?
Before covid, I would be sick with a cold or flu for a total of about two weeks every year. That means I spent 4% of my time sick; one out of every 25 days. Since covid appeared, I've been wearing an N95 in crowded indoor areas whenever I reasonably can. (Obviously I can't if I'm eating something.) My main goal initially was to protect my elderly relatives, but during the last four years I have not gotten sick even once, except from my elderly relatives who didn't wear masks, got sick, and then infected me when I was caring for them. Why isn't everyone wearing N95s? Sure, it's uncomfortable, but being sick is much more uncomfortable. And then there's the fact that wearing an N95 protects *other people* and not just the wearer...
There appears to be no straightforward way to permanently stop Windows 11 Home from rebooting on its own after installing updates. I looked for workarounds but so far I have only found a script that has to run on a schedule to block the reboot by changing "working hours". ([Link.](https://superuser.com/questions/1843873/windows-11-seems-to-have-disabled-all-ways-to-get-around-auto-update-restarts-i)) Is that really the best that is possible?
I have an Intel i7-4770 CPU (from 2013) and I don't think I have ever been CPU-bound so I would rather not spend money on upgrading it. However, I want to upgrade my graphics card to a Radeon RX 7600. My motherboard supports PCIE 3.0 which the RX 7600 is fine with. Is there anything I should look out for? I'm worried that I'm missing something that will prevent me from running a 2023 video card on hardware ten years older than that. (In case anyone is curious, my current video card is a GeForce GTX 960. It has been good enough for Diablo 2 Resurrected but I don't think it will be able to handle Baldur's Gate 3.)
I bought a new-in-box LG V20 about 18 months ago because I was tired of phones without removable batteries and headphone jacks. However, it gets absolutely terrible reception for some reason (as in, no signal in the middle of Manhattan). Some guy had the same problem and he soldered a big antenna to his phone to fix it. I might try to do that but given how great I am at soldering, there's a good chance I'll break the phone. Should I do it? I don't want to have to buy a modern phone with a built-in battery but I can't just have a phone which doesn't work when I'm away from wi-fi...
Driving is the most comfortable, convenient, and fun mode of transportation. Walking and biking can be OK but only for traveling relatively short distances in good weather. Mass transit is inherently unpleasant. No matter how nice you try to make it (and most mass transit systems aren't nice) the fact of the matter is that passengers are still stuck in a crowded box with a bunch of strangers and limited to traveling to the mass transit system's destinations on the mass transit system's schedule. Compare this to getting into your own car and driving wherever you want, whenever you want... I currently live in a place too crowded for driving to be practical - I get that places like this need mass transit. But needing mass transit sucks!