Since Twitter is now part of SpaceX, does that mean Twitter is classified as a common carrier too? Can Twitter no longer refuse to allow certain individuals use their platform?
Apple wants to vertically integrate. Their AI strategy until recently was to develop their own LLM models that were small enough to run on device. But massive scaling is what makes LLMs so powerful, so all their internal models were terrible and unusable.
Basically they bet that compute efficient LLMs were the future. That bet was wrong and the opposite came true.
Modern concrete construction uses iron rebar liberally. That means every concrete structure built today will crack and crumble in a few hundred years at most, as the iron absorbs oxygen, it swells from the rust. Which is a shame, roman concrete buildings without rebar will still be standing 1000s of years from now.
Roman construction was also much less efficient because they had no material (besides wood) capable of carrying load in tension. Rebar allows us to make cheap practical structures that are impossible with just concrete - roman style or not.
It would be quite fascinating to see what kind of structure we could produce if we decided to make the longest lasting cement structures we could create with modern technology, and assuming minimal maintenance over the lifetime of the building. A one-and-done kind of structure.
I bet we could do fairly well. Hundreds, maybe even thousands of years. We've learned a lot about how to form exceptionally long lasting cement. We just choose not to do it that way, most of the time.
Petrified wood is stone. The stone matrix has formed around a wood structure, but the properties which remain are those of stone, not wood.
Wood is a composite material, strong under both compression and tension. It's the fibres in wood (lignans) which provide the latter. Stone (and unreinforced concrete) lack such fibre elements, and are strong only under compression.
With stone it's necessary to build compression structures such as arches and domes for heavy load-bearing, and taller structures must be significantly flared out at the base (or utilise buttresses, as with gothic cathedrals) for stability. Structures under tension can be far more lightweight and compact.
Steel-box construction and reinforced concrete both offer tension-based strength, but are also susceptible to metallic oxidation (rust), which limits the life of such structures. A nonmetallic fibre (natural or synthetic) might offer an alternative to this, and I've seen some work investigating this, though there may be other issues (e.g., depolymerisation of plastics over long periods of time).
The pendulum is in full swing. Soon it will be ban worthy offense to suggest there are more than two genders.
Though I am morbidly enjoying the irony of seeing those on the left suddenly discover an interest in free speech, and those on the right discover their love for campaigning to get people deplatformed.
I'm beginning to put together that party-lines are strictly about gaining and holding power at all costs. Irony disappears through that lens and the way people act makes much more sense.
I think there's a stark difference between government control of free speech and authoritarianism (Right wing) and activists using social clout or 'mob justice' to deplatform people (Left wing). Both aren't good, but there's a huge difference.
All of which are private institutions and therefore are valid expressions of free speech in and of themselves, even if you found it corrosive.
The idea the government needs to step in to tell HR departments what mixture of ideas they’re allowed to hire and reward is ridiculous. That is an actual affront to free speech.
If you don’t like woketard social dynamics, make your own HR department that lacks them, duh.
To actually implement firearm detection your 3d printer would need to have the ability to reverse engineer the 3d solid model from g-code, then compare that solid model to a list of banned objects.
Some argue that THC in cannabis actually works similarly because when herbivores regularly ingest it, they become lethargic and lazy, causing them struggle to survive in the world. Kinda like my roommate.
Ibotenic acid, muscarine, psilocybin, amanitin, muscimol, THC, caffeine - these all natural pesticides target bugs primarily. Which are the biggest threat. Sort of funny how it also affects people though
But cannabis the needs heat to convert, it’s more likely it evolved with Human influence considering the years of overlapping land races tied to our trade routes
I have a hypothesis that taking cannabis (and especially CBD) out of our food chain may be contributing to the increase¹ in prevalence of chronic pain.
The farm bill makes 'hemp' anything with below 0.3% THC legal. For this reason, we have a LOT of testing on the THC content of cannabis, since it is required to sell and manufacture. As it turns out, naturally cannabis quite commonly has >0.3% THC even before heating or activation of THCa.
Any human-like animal with our receptors eating a large amount would get high as fuck, cooked or not. A ruminant eating pounds of the stuff raw, would not be that different from a human consuming an ounce of baked pot.
your last sentence reminds me of my dorm roommate in college. very standard stoner who was constantly blazing and years later i've never known a lazier dude.
>Those gigantic clinical trials (some of the largest RCTs ever conducted) didn't detect this issue because of its extreme rarity.
You assume good faith on their part. These studies are run by the same companies that stand to make billions based off the study outcomes. For example we know now when a toddler died in the Moderna covid RTC of cardiac arrest after vaccination they reportedly covered it up and didn't report it.
This all is starting to sound a lot like what happened with vioxx. Where an increase in heart problems was detected in RTC but covered up. Vioxx would go on to cause an estimated 50000 deaths from heart attack.
> These studies are run by the same companies that stand to make billions based off the study outcomes
No they're not. Studies are run by a distributed network of large, medium, and small businesses who are independently following the "recipe" designed by the pharma company.
Then this data is submitted back to the pharma company and collated into a report that is given to the FDA.
It is effectively impossible to systematically get a couple hundred or couple thousand independent trial sites to misreport safety data.
It is possible that the pharma company could manipulate data during collation, but unsurprisingly there is a vast infrastructure to detect this and gargantuan penalties for when they're discovered.
> For example we know now when a toddler died in the Moderna covid RTC of cardiac arrest after vaccination they reportedly covered it up and didn't report it.
This is literally not true. You can find the death reported in the exact regulatory filing exactly when and where it should have been reported. What happened is that a Substack author found it and has made it seem like it was not reported.
Re Vioxx comparison:
Sure we should always be vigilant for another Vioxx. The way we do that is through fair and levelheaded analysis of the data we have available. Right now, that analysis lands very clearly on the side of vaccines. At the scale of vaccine rollout, we would not need to squint to see signal of a major problem.
Honest question here.