zdp7

The information available via the public record is not as detailed (typically annual salary)and not definitively tied to any person. The Work Number is tied to your SSN and is much more detailed than the public record (each paycheck and a breakdown of different compensation).

That will be 4M for the entire country, not just industry (80% of China's electricity comes from fossil fuels, electrifying won't help). I would also expect it not be 4M after the start of the war. Most of the electricity generated in China is from fossil fuels. China will be in the dark if they have to survive on domestic production.

I also suspect your production estimates and military strength estimates are overblown. Why? If China could pull that off Taiwan would already be in China's hands. If China were to attack Taiwan the US would have more than enough bases to land in. Japan isn't going to refuse US air force landings. They will be in the war too.

China is smarter than to fire ICBMs at the US. That would be the end for them. Even if the nukes were limited to US and China (they won't be, Russia can't assume they aren't being targeted from the US) both countries would now be easy pickings for other nations.

Not a war crime for the US. The US hasn't signed the Additional Protocol I that prohibits their attack (unless they are being used for military production). Now if you think we won't attack the dams, you are sadly mistaken. The US's last attack on a dam was in 2017 (Tabqa Dam). The US will not just eat it if attacked. Think of the fallout from 9/11. US took over two countries, because of that. Just in case you think we were defeated, that's fine I don't agree. An F15 can carry 1800Kg bunker busters and there will be tons of cruise missiles. The dams will be destroyed if US wants them to be.

China produces 4M imports almost 12M barrels a day. If they lose any significant portion of that oil, their ability to manufacture will be impaired. Fuel for agriculture will also be impacted. I'd also expect major dams to be destroyed. I'm thinking that alone would destroy a huge amount of food production. All of this ignores that it won't be just the US fighting. China is antagonizing just about everyone in the South China sea. No ship will make it to US shores. They will be sunk long before they get there. ICBMs are the only option and that would be an excellent way to cause a nuclear retaliatory strike. Once anything intercontinental is launched the other has to assume it's nuclear. And I think the US will come out better on that, too.

I suspect they will need it to build ships. If you look at the Wikipedia page for the Three Gorges dam, you will find a graph showing that two thirds of annual electrical production is fossil fuel based. If the US is involved, I suspect very little oil will make it into China. I would also expect the vast majority of hydro power to be destroyed. I would doubt they could build many ships once war starts.

China can't win. If there was any lesson nations of the world should have learned from WW2 is you need resources. Oil in particular for ships. China is an net importer of oil. The US is a net exporter and the largest oil producer in the world. Second there is no defender advantage at sea. Defender advantage comes from built up defenses. The only thing you can do at sea is mine. That will be a problem for both sides. China also doesn't have the air power to win. Now the biggest problem for China is a population of around 1.4 billion people. This comes back to a resource issue. China is also a net importer of food. Ships aren't going to help. The Ukraine war has shown they are very vulnerable to cheap drones. I suspect the US doesn't see an investment in ships to be a high priority. Air power is what matters and they are behind.

The issue is an environmental one. The cost here is environmental damage. The solution will need to be policy decisions that take that damage into account.

What you are missing is that as it grows most of the rice is not underwater. You need pesticides to protect what's above the water. Average height is about 4 feet (1.2 meters).

The problem here isn't that you can get the right answer with additional prompting. The problem is how do we verify an answer when we don't know the answer? If it tells me 5 sisters and it should be 6, it failed. If I have to provide additional information, it really isn't reasoning. I would argue to show the ability to reason, it needs to be able to work out the answer completely on it's own. If I were testing a human the only input I would provide is that they are wrong and to try again. AI is very useful, but at this point I'm not comfortable asking questions I don't already know the answer for.

The thing is it wouldn't have been expensive to test. In the article they describe the testing they did after they treated her for auto-brewery syndrome. The gave her an oral administration of glucose and then observed her alcohol levels. It would lead me to believe a pretty easy means to diagnose auto-brewery would be to check BAC, give them glucose and then retest BAC. If it goes down they at the very least aren't currently suffering from auto-brewery. If it goes up, that would be a pretty strong indicator they are suffering from it. Have an orderly or nurse observe to verify no alcohol was consumed if you want.

I am serious that I can envision a drone that could be used for crop dusting. I personally wouldn't use a quad copter, but probably something more like a 20-30 foot flying wing powered by a small gas engine. My example of a predator drone was to illustrate that it is entirely possible to design a UAV that greatly exceeds the specs needed for crop dusting. I also think most people here are vastly underestimating what a Agricultural UAV is capable of. Take a look at this page https://store.tmotor.com/product/P80-v3-pin-kv100-p-type.htm... and some of their possible configurations.

You are taking a very narrow view of what a drone is. The MQ-9A Reaper drone has an almost 2 ton payload capacity and flight endurance of 27 hours. I can totally envision a purpose built drone that could mount a crop dusters spray rig. It just most likely wouldn't be an electric quadcopter.

A bit late here, but... You are ignoring a lot of evidence. SJ stating they asked for permission twice. One of which was requested days before they released it. The Her tweet would seem to corroborate it's meant to sound like her. They then take it down (presumably since they aren't confident they'd win and don't want to be subjected to discovery.) Because of their tweet, even if the voice actors normal voice was identical to SJ, it's pretty clear they were trying to profit off her voice.

After reading the article and the comments, I noticed there weren't statistics backing up either the article or many of the comments. In one of the comments the author of the article states their proposed solution would to put two bollards on each corner at an intersection. Considering the unkind descriptions of engineers abilities, I hoped their argument would be well thought out. You can judge for yourself.

https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/road-users/pedestr...

According to this webpage in 2021 there were 7522 pedestrian deaths on public roads.

The first statistic to standout was only 23.6% or about 1775 actually occur at an intersection.

The next statistic I found interesting was that only 18.63% of fatalities occur during the daytime. This strongly suggests the issue is visibility and not drivers cutting corners or plowing into corners.

Alcohol was involved in 43% of accidents and 24% of that the pedestrian was the only one drunk.

From my very short look at statistics, I believe bollards would have almost no effect on pedestrian safety. It's pretty easy to realize that it is people that are in the street already and aren't being seen. There isn't an epidemic of cars on sidewalks.

Look up aphantasia on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphantasia they have a sidebar describing the spectrum of the ability to visualize images. The highest level is considered photographic. The other side is the inability to visualize anything.

Remember, though that LLMs also need the accumulated evolutionary activity. They're not that interesting if you don't feed them human created content. Contrast that with the human computer that builds itself and then infers language and complicated physical and mental tasks.

Astronomy oriented sites tend to focus more on whether your view is obscured by clouds. I don't recall where I saw it, but I seem to recall one site claiming to use prediction models focused on cloud cover.

Try https://clearoutside.com It's an astronomy oriented site. Edit: https://astrospheric.com also looks to be an option with Eclipse specific maps.

Try pressing esc a few times while booting for a uefi boot or hold shift if booting with bios. Assuming GRUB.

The 44B was to buy ownership of Twitter. It went to the shareholders.