glimshe

Centuries ago, going perhaps only as far as 19th century, much of science was done as a hobby by people who had the smarts and the time (which was a luxury).

Over time, the cost to do science increased gradually. What required just a few hours of free time started requiring many hours. Then money to make small machines. Then big machines... Then it became out of reach for almost any private individual.

Now it's out of reach for anyone who doesn't have data centers full of GPUs, even major universities depending on the field.

It's a boring read. Don't click.

Is it any less competitive now?

That said, I'd love to train AI to do my personal projects. While I enjoy coding, it's way too slow. I do my projects for the design journey and the final result. It would be great to get calls from AI for direction and assistance, if needed, while it does all the raw coding work for me.

Someone else mentions Blue Prince here. I think that's a much better game relatively speaking, even if not having Clair Obscur's exceptional art.

The picture subtitle says everything that needs to be said about this: "Miners like De Beers have positioned diamonds as synonymous with love and devotion."

Scumbags.

... which unfortunately makes planetarium software less and less useful over time. For most people, driving to a dark site can take hours if not days of travel :(

I have a telescope but haven't used it in years. I considered switching 100% to Internet telescopes, but the existing solutions are expensive and clunky. I wonder what the future of the hobby is.

My question to any mathematician reading this: does the above make ANY sense to you?

I ask that because I can read most technical material related to computer engineering, programming, hardware specifications etc. Even if I don't fully understand all details, I can follow them pretty well. So I wonder if professional mathematicians can look at the above and still make sense of it like experienced software engineers do for computer stuff.