thrown_22

$4 is not exorbitant it's barely something to notice.

I was kicking him when he wasn't on the ground too.

Their released numbers. Least we forget this is the country that declared war on sparrows and lost.

It has and multiple times at that. Least we forget it's the only way that any country, including the US, has ever industrialized.

Assuming that the people in charge are able to do basic analysis is pretty far fetched.

> The obvious explanation for other country's vaccine recommendations is based in data. COVID kills the elderly (75+) who are more likely to be battling multiple negative health conditions beyond COVID.

That something so obvious was enough to get you labeled a conspiracy theorist and banned off all major social media for close to two years has set back trust in science by decades.

Nice. They do seem to have filled out the language nicely.

Question from the last time this came up: have they added let/letrec into the language yet? The last time I it looked like they had not.

This is a 300 word post. It's barely a tweet. The idea it could have a preliminary thesis, let alone a central one, stretches credulity.

>In mathematics, Richardson's theorem establishes the undecidability of the equality of real numbers defined by expressions involving integers, π, ln ⁡ 2 , {\displaystyle \ln 2,} and exponential and sine functions. It was proved in 1968 by mathematician and computer scientist Daniel Richardson of the University of Bath.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richardson%27s_theorem

You don't need child care when women aren't in the work force.

Yet China today is saying "Have three kids" and the Chinese people are by and large saying "Meh".

It's easy to grow exponentially when you're going from 3% to 6%.

I'm happy to have helped you take the first step on a journey of a billion miles.

A 60 year old woman can't give birth. It doesn't matter what incentives governments will give in 20 years: you can't beat biology. The women who can give birth in decades need to be born today. Yet birthrates are at their lowest levels ever. _Every_ developed country and most developing countries have committed suicide already, it's just that it will take 40 years for anyone to notice.

The West is betting that immigrants will keep magically appearing whenever needed. The problem is that outside of a few countries torn apart by civil wars _nowhere_ are birth rates constant or let alone increasing. To put it in perspective: Bangladesh is below replacement fertility levels today. 40 years ago it had 8 children born per woman. Let me repeat that: Bangladesh today has fewer children born per woman than the US did in 2009.

The brains harmed were the ones who created this, not the ones consuming it. Happy to see that AI models are so close to reading comprehension though.

Low quality articles that people only read the title of is how web forums die.

This is an extremely low quality article that I hope was written by an AI model so no human brains were harmed during it's production.

Interesting paper for finding a function which fits the given data, however they way oversell the ability of any such model:

>Then, an SR algorithm would ideally re-discover the well-known expression (or an equivalent formulation thereof) F = G × m1 m2 r2 , with G = 6.6743 × 10−11, by opportunely combining the mathematical operations (here, of multiplication and division) with the variables and constant at play

F in this case is the second derivative of the curve of motion of mass, _either_ mass. Yet given a sampling of data the best you could do would be one equation for the motion of mass one and another for m2. The fact they are equal is not an NP-hard problem but equivalent to the halting problem. Similarly for deciding that the equation is a differential equation.

A Fourier expansion is a symbolic fitting of data to a curve, yet it provides no information about the systems sampled as shown by the fact that it fits a geocentric model just as well as a heliocentric one.

The idea that an arbitrarily large expression is somehow more understandable than the fourier coefficients of a the first few large terms could only have been done by someone who hasn't looked the the vast array of semi-empirical formulas out there which are as clear as mud.

Is this written by an AI? I was waiting for the article and it never arrived.

You're ignoring what it takes to bring the coal to the powerplant too.

OP was making the point that boiler to wheels efficiency of electrics is higher than ices. It isn't when you factor in all the conversion losses.

It's a really simple point that battery zealots fail to grasp.

So the asbestos lobby was right and there's nothing dangerous about snorting it. It's after all just a funny shaped silicate that's totally benign.

Nothing of a lot is a lot less than all of a little.

You're missing the engine efficiency. Which is another ~90% efficiency process. That brings it down to be lower than an ice.

Keep moving the goalposts bud.

OP made a blatantly false claim. She was wrong. That's it.

Or to bring coal to the power plant.

In normal times yes. In a recession there are no greener pastures.

>- electric cars are still burning fossil fuels cause powerplants burn fossil fuels (yeah, but electric cars go ~2 times further on 1 liter of fuel even if all our power came from fossil fuels which it doesn't)

No they don't. When you add the efficiency of the grid, the charging station, charging the battery and discharging the battery burning a lump of coal to power your Tesla has _no_ advantage over burning a bottle of petrol for your non SUV.

This is a lot like the meme that solar is cheap - the part that's always left out: "At noon".

Cyanide is just carbon and nitrogen. How could it be possibly toxic?

The people being laid off in the first rounds are not the best and brightest. You get those people in the 10th round before a hostile restructuring.