This makes one of the “solutions” from the article: “A law was introduced at the end of 2023 that will eliminate the need for permits and environmental impact assessments for bridges that are being widened to add lanes as part of renovations.” look particularly shortsighted. Infrastructure is a maintenance debt that we are reckoning with, so we will make it easier to build specifically bigger infrastructure so that in 25 years we will have an even bigger problem to solve? Not to mention the concept of induced demand meaning that those lanes are going to increase the amount of vehicles using the bridge, which would be exactly the kind of thing that should get an environmental assessment, versus repurposing some lanes for sustainable transit or building a separate bridge for those modes

If you use the right color of light, then the doppler effect means that the atoms will only absorb (and be pushed by) light that they are headed towards. That means that the light will always act as a brake for the atoms and never an accelerator, so the fluid will cool. If you do this from all directions, the fluid will start to stay still in one place and get very close to absolute zero. Idk, I just read the Wikipedia article, but that is my best attempt at an ELI18

Low key convinced this started out as “monster hail” and then got butchered by an AI or like 5 Google translate passes

Easy. His, erm, broad stature makes him an easy whipping target when it comes time to drive the capitalist pigs and their market stands out of the temple

The fact that you mixed up the Dakotas in your comparison to cities really emphasizes your point

Buses and trains. That, or spaghetti interchange that are bigger than the rest of the city. Also, replace key arterial roads with a pedestrian path, call that path a park, and charge $20 for entry. That will easily fund all the city services and nobody will be too inconvenienced by having to pocket their car as they walk across the “park” to get between neighborhoods. Now excuse me, I have to go murder a little blue bird that won’t shut up about the garbage piling up

You’re not wrong that GPU and AI silicon design are tightly coupled, but my point was that both of the GPU manufacturers are dedicating hardware to AI/ML in their consumer products. Nvidia has the tensor cores in its GPUs that it justifies to consumers with DLSS and RT but we’re clearly designed for AI/ML use cases when they presented them with Turing. AMD has the XDNA AI Engine that it is putting its APUs separate from its RDNA GPUs

Fair enough. Was just asking because the choice of company surprised me. AMD is putting "AI Engines in their new CPUs (separate silicon design from their GPUs) and while Nvidia largely only sells GPUs that are less universal, they’ve had dedicated AI hardware (tensor cores) in their offerings for the past three generations. If anything, Intel is barely keeping up with its competition in this area (for the record, I see vanishingly little value in the focus on AI as a consumer, so this isn’t really a ding on Intel in my books, more so making the observation from a market forces perspective)

Why call out Intel? Pretty sure AMD and Nvidia are both putting dedicated AI hardware in all of their new and upcoming product lines. From what I understand they are even generally doing it better than Intel. Hell, Qualcomm is advertising their AI performance on their new chips and so is Apple. I don’t think there is anyone in the chip world that isn’t hopping on the AI train

How nearby is nearby though? And, in the context of the proposed use case for defending a crowded stadium in a populated area, does this put people down range as well that could also be impaired by the pellets?

Or they are just approaching net worth 0 after years of working off student loan debt. There are plenty of people who would be in position to have a near infinite or even a negative effective wealth tax rate because so many college graduates (and college dropouts) in America are starting well below zero net worth

Hign speed rail is really more effective at cutting down short domestic flight and the number of cars driving on interstates than it is at enabling car-free lifestyles. Not to say it doesnt help with that, but the correct tool for that job is local transit and bikable/walkable communities, which both Houston and DFW are working on, even if they are under constant threat of regression by the irresponsible actions of TXDOT aka the highway widening mafia

If someone is being paid to work in those expensive areas, the pay should be sufficient to live in or near those expensive areas. It’s entitlement for the employer class that this isn’t the case. The implications of it not being the case (the existence of a class of people in these areas that struggle to afford basic necessities, the extension of psyche-degrading and environmentally destructive commutes, the tearing apart of our societal fabric that comes from isolated suburban commuting living) are all horrificly negative at scale. You may live and work in a situation that is independent of those negatives (you found a good enough paying job in a low cost of living area, or maybe even you work remote, or you don’t mind the isolation and destructive nature of the exurban commute) and that is good for you, but to imply that the whole nation needs to follow your example or stop complaining shows a sore lack of awareness about how scalable the solution you personally found is.

The monkeys paw curls, everyone now has to drive from the perspective of a back seat passenger looking over the driver’s shoulder

You can absolutely make that distinction, but speaking as another meat eater, it’s not really a given that factory farming is more like one than the other

Is the creation of a nuclear-armed North Korea in the Middle East with an effective ballistic missile program the change you wish to see in the world?

Average annual cost of car ownership is something like $12000 depending on how you calculate it. That is enough money for you to take one of those $40 round trip Ubers to the mall almost every day, and any of those style trips you can replace with transit or active transportation is even more money in your pocket, if you can swing it with your locale (don’t want to assume)

Any Lords of Sealand want to convince your peers to issue a law that what the USSR did was legal and that, in fact, Crimea was supposed to be interpreted as “everything west of the Urals”? Seems like it would hold about the same amount of water

Just in time for a very rough Senate map. Senate isn’t hours of reps, but there unfortunately aren’t a ton of probable outcomes without Republican control of at least one law-making entity (plus the Supreme Court)

Easy. It’s fake because conservatives would never express the idea of a moist vagina as a positive. Female pleasure is an anathema to them because it means there isn’t an unbalanced power dynamic favoring them