I don’t know, but somebody is going to have to keister some glitter for it.

You would have to have an incredible grindset to become a decent engineer without actually enjoying any of it. You could become a shitty one just by passing tests, I guess. (And probably many people do)

Shit, I wrote that wrong. Trying to do too many things at once.

I mean, it is really big and looks like it’s in the way, although I wonder if it’s also parked wrong.

Maybe the owner needs a large pickup, but relatively few owners of large pickups do. For the rest it’s conspicuous consumption, which is always gross, and in cars seems to correlate with antisocial behavior.

The name might well have come from the community, since the whole app store model is as old as the modern smartphone, and downloading a different way is new, while possible, was always for power users.

If there had been a more normal software ecosystem from the get-go that would have been nice. Actual regulation to enforce device freedom would also be good.

It’s not like it’s a unique offering at this point either. Everyone and their dog has complicated syrupy coffee/tea drinks on their menu.

I don’t know, maybe the busy-but-nicer-than-McDonalds ambiance is worth it to some people. If it’s anything like Tim Hortons, lots of people just buy out of pure habit as well. Either way, that’s their business, not the person selling it.

Flew over the may day rally in San Francisco.

Don’t take the bait.

TBF the only people that have to answer for it are the ones still buying them.

Like, he may literally have been thinking “because you dumb bitches will pay that”, but obviously couldn’t say it.

A really big neighborhood or single factory, and it’s not cheap (upfront), even if you believe their own cost projections. OP was talking about the “plutonium to heat your personal swimming pool” kind of scale. (That’s an actual idea Glen Seaborg put forward in the 50’s, BTW)

It’s also worth mentioning intrinsic safety is kind of mutually exclusive with fast reactors that can use waste. If your neutrons are at millions of degrees it’s a lot harder to set up a feedback loop with reactor’s temperature at all, let alone an unbreakably stable one.

Okay, so lets say you figure out a way to build a desktop-sized nuclear power plant that doesn’t produce any radioactivity. And, to keep it simple, lets say there’s no other unusual, unexpected properties to do with safety.

We’ll use it, and we’ll use it a lot. It’ll power the next generation of EVs, for example, and lithium batteries might be relegated to a few rare niche uses only. You wouldn’t need to charge it, you’d just replace it every couple decades. If it’s cheap it might find it’s way into lesser appliances and devices as well. It’s possible the biggest impact will come from things that wouldn’t even work without that much energy density, and that we don’t have a name for yet. If the devices are really cheap it might become a nuisance or environmental hazard, like wonder-material plastic has.

The one big issue it could have, is if there’s a way for all that energy to release suddenly. You’ve explicitly ruled that out, though. (And for what it’s worth, it’s very, very hard to make real nuclear reactions finish both completely and quickly, to the point it just doesn’t happen by accident. It’s even hard to make happen on purpose)

And letting the US government spy on you helps with that?

In reality, people are built for the stone age and a little out of their depth with 21st century technology. Unless there’s some visual indicator of the spying their normal social instincts don’t kick in.

Well this feels like bait.

I mean, there’s no real way for any of us to prove it will be interpreted one way or another, even if the rest of us are sure. So, in the name of not being a pedant, I guess you can see it that way.

It’s not a “false solid”, which would be the antonym. Glass is not an ordinary solid, I guess that would be true.

They want to hear something really surprising but true.

Solid means it can deform elastically under shear stress, or equivalently can hold it’s shape indefinitely under shear. Crystal means the atoms are arranged in a repeating lattice. Glass is both solid and non-crystalline.

It’d be pedantry, if that didn’t also match our intuitive understanding of solids. What you said implies to people that glass might have fluid-like properties.

Maybe? One-vote margins have happened, but they’re pretty rare. The basic idea of strategic voting is also obvious to most people, if not some Lemmy kinds of people.

You could say that you’re not not supporting them, at least. Some parties hope for low turnout.

It mostly sounds fake, because it’s never explained very well.

Just the fact that something can be correlated more strongly than anything classical but also not allow signaling might be. I don’t know, I find it hella confusing, even if you can show that pretty straightforwardly without any actual quantum mechanics.

Thank you for reading the room. And sorry women’s healthcare sucks.

Which honestly says more about what temperature is than about entropy or information. (It can be defined as energy per entropy)

Wild guess, as not-OP: Information is conserved at the microscopic level, while it’s really not macroscopically, and entropy is (the logarithm of) the missing piece. Ergo, it contains a record of everything that’s happened that’s no longer directly visible.