znyboy

I think you missed the point entirely. All of these "prediction market" gambling platforms are actively predatory to their users, with very little (if any) regulatory oversight.

That quote also stuck out to me. It'd be more accurate to say a dozen laptops.

Crabs are already quite susceptible to ants, due to ants being small enough to swarm and attack the joints and gaps of the crab's carapace.

I personally welcome this change. Anecdotally, I experienced unimpeded and unsupervised internet access throughout my younger teenage years, and was exposed to some truly horrendous material courtesy of the bigger social platforms. My parents knew I used social media. They believed it was fine because it was "just MySpace and Facebook".

Meanwhile, I witnessed large amounts of open bullying between my peers, recordings of physical assaults, underage revenge pornography, and a massive decline of people physically spending time together outside of online contexts, culminating in widespread loneliness and isolation.

In recent times I have seen the dramatic failure of social media companies to moderate their content, actively promoting extremist content, and even openly protecting the originators of illicit material.

Rates of youth suicide skyrocketed shortly after the rise of smartphones, social media and always-available internet access as evident by published statistics. While none of these can be individually attributed as the cause of this rise, all are undoubtedly a contributing factor, as suggested by countless studies globally.

Monkeys with typewriters, or teenagers with MacBooks?

Considering that 300 light-nanoseconds is about 90m, getting a response (or even just one-way) in that time is essentially running right at the limits of physics/causality.

I made an art program I titled PixelSmoosh: https://gitlab.com/zanehenderson/pixelsmoosh

You give it a set of source images and a target image. For each pixel in the target image, it will look at the same pixel in each of the source images and choose the closest colour, using that pixel to then paint a new image.

This particular robot was revealed back in 2022. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31190875

That seems to be the installer for Asahi Linux: https://asahilinux.org/

It's not you, it seems any site that forces HTTPS will fail.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that it's all a gigantic fraud, as there are some small worthwhile innovations in distributed cryptographic verification. However, almost every single addition to that point is riddled with corruption and scams for what is essentially a gigantic linked list.

We have lit a metaphorical forest on fire with proof-of-work mining and been told that it's good for the environment. We have charged a weeks wages in transaction fees for a loaf of bread and been told that it's good for the poor. We have seen people lose their life savings over typos and been told that it's a good store of value. We have allowed blockchain founders to walk away with billions of stolen savings and been told that it's decentralized.

As a generalization, blockchains and cryptocurrencies cause more far more damage than good.

For what it's worth, the work of an few engineers implementing the business decisions of their employer does not make those people inherently evil. It is their job, and they need to pay the bills somehow.

This change is highly anti-consumer and potentially unethical, yes, but it makes perfect sense towards the group's own business interests.

The first name that stood out to me was Ron Rivest, of RSA, MD5, and public-key cryptography fame.

I've seen a lot of complaints about the minimum requirement of TPM 2.0, and many computers not having one.

In my case on a Z270 PC from 2017, a BIOS update enabled the dormant and otherwise unadvertised TPM.

As a correction, they were aiming to replace the usage of Chalk with Nanocolors on the grounds of (questionable) performance improvements.

As a person with minimal academic physics experience, I've occasionally wondered if the action of passing mass through a wormhole would violate the conservation of energy.

Say if one side of a wormhole is near an astronomical object, and another in an arbitrary point in empty space, then would the change in potential energy of the transmitted mass due to gravity be converted to another form?

If it were the case that the field of gravity were to be transmissible through a wormhole, then would opening or closing a wormhole consume or release an enormous amount of energy equal to the change in potential energy of the surrounding matter?

I suspect the time dilation could also be an issue, where objects passed through a wormhole are stretched or compressed akin to gravitational spaghettification, or if objects surrounding the wormhole experience time dilation due to the stretched spacetime.