how is this wrong? A helmet protects your head and thus your brain.
It makes sense wear helmets in situations where your head is more prone to be damaged (e.g. construction work, or in this case biking).
just make it look like an accident and you are not responsible for starting a nuclear war. counting the number of people accidentally falling out of windows these days certain organizations seem to have more of them..
while this might be true for most of Twitter, my experience is very different. I've been following researchers mostly and aside from very recently published work there are very interesting conversations or thought threads.so i guess it heavily depends on your Twitter bubble
I have the impression, that now some of them seem to really end up in some practical applications. Funnily enough someone just today showed me a feature of his phone where you can select some undesired objects in youe photo and it would just replace them with a fitting background indistinguishable from the original photo.
I still havent heard of a solution to nuclear waste. In my opinion nuclear could be the transition technology though. Also nuclear is not cheap at all from what ive read..
I like the fact that we are made of atoms. Even if we die they will remain, even if it is only energy. So, for me its very comforting to think that sure i will stop exisiting as this configuration of tiny particles, however its not the end, its just a reconfiguration and i will become one with the universe, a tiny part of everything.
While i agree that it is more difficult to distribute computational load between cpu and gpu than it aught to be, Gpu is not necessary faster for all workloads than cpu, it is very specific. Most of computations can probably be executex faster on cpu.
Confusingly i dont think its that simple. If you equate wealth to work, then with increased automatization, you can grow wealth without stealing it from someone else. Not saying that you can't increase wealth through exploitation though.
If you read the paper they are very very careful with their claims. Also please prove us wrong is the default position in science, thats what peer review is all about. I dont see a problem with that.
I agree. How crazy is it to think its ok for donations to one of the established parties should have repercussions on your emplyment? Dont people see that the other side could want the same thing then.
Replacement makes sense, your friend with extra artery will survive in case of a critical surgery and might have another kid while you'd die with no extra kid. Does not need to happen to you but on average.
Your friend with better bloodflow might also have a stronger erection and therefore on average more kids (pulling this out of my ass obviously). You dont need to have any obvious disadvantages, on average it might still work better..
So this means evolution actually reacted on progress on medicine and we are evolving our own spare parts for surgical procedures. While this makes sense im still amazed!
This is a very interesting question and one would hope that non repressive societies are more creative and have a higher scientific output. Im not 100 % sure thats the case, however.