The UK won’t allow them at all. Recently, someone imported one elsewhere in Europe. When they brought it to the UK, it got seized as dangerous. Even though it wasn’t even UK registered. I believe several other countries view it in the same light.
I’d actually be surprised if they even fit on a lot of European roads.
True, but they weren’t really used much as flying cars till later. I might be wrong on exactly when they moved from military to “rich transport to the race track”, however.
We’ve had flying cars since the 70s, they are called helicopters.
The issue with a flying car for general use, is one of maintenance and safety. If an older car breaks down, it causes a tailback. If a flying car breaks down, it could demolish a school. The higher standards required means higher costs. That means rich people only. The rich use helicopters in exactly that manner.
This is one of the biggest frustrations with nuclear power. The first power plants had issues (mostly due to them being bomb factory designs). We learnt from that, and designed better ones. They never got built. They were swamped in red tape and delays until they died.
Decades later, China comes in and just asks nicely. The designs work fine. China now leads the way, built on research we left to rot.
It’s also worth noting that there is a big difference between a fusion power plant and a fission one. China is doing active research on it, as is the west. There’s quite a friendly rivalry going on. We have also basically cracked fusion now. We just need to scale it up. The only big problem left is the tokamakite issue. The neutron radiation put off by the reaction transmutes the walls. Using radioactive materials as a buffer is an idea I’ve not heard of. I’m curious about the end products. A big selling point of fusion is the lack of long term waste. Putting a fission reaction in there too might lose that benefit.
The basic rule is that you can say what you want (and people can call you what they want for it!).
It would be polite to self moderate to an extent. No point getting the instance owners in to legal hot water. That’s a massively higher bar than Reddit has set however. Chatting about and admiring Luigi is completely fine.
In fairness, the only thing many people will lack is water. It’s not an exclusive stash, but in addition to what’s in your cupboards.
You can get 10L or 25L quite cheaply. 1 should do per person, maybe with an extra for cooking. Or just grab some big bottles of water.
A hand cranked flashlight, candles and lighter are all a must anyhow, for a power cut. It might also be worth having a cheap camping stove tucked away.
Food wise. It’s just a big bag of pasta or rice, along with some cans/jars to make it pleasant to eat. Throw in some hiking snack bars and you’re sorted.
It lets your phone use the larger screen for satnav. It also reconfigures it to a better setup for driving (bigger buttons and reduced complexity). This also means your phone doesn’t need to be sat in the sun, with its screen lit up for a couple of hours, and so overheating.
My phone no longer even leaves my pocket. It wirelessly links to the entertainment system.
It’s obviously the MAGA crowd. They’ve spent years complaining about electric vehicles. They’ve just escalated that to burning them out. The police need to go have a nice chat with the rolling coal types.
I’ve noticed 2 types on this, stick-in-the-muds and peak-hunters.
Stick in the muds latch on to the first version of a belief they encounter properly. They will stubbornly hang on to that for as long as possible.
Peak hunters are the opposite, they will rapidly change beliefs to maximise the results/find truth.
Interestingly, after some time, the 2 groups look almost identical. The peak hunters tend to find the ‘best’ version of their belief, based on their existing memeplex. To budge them, you need to show a different belief is better, on their rankings (not yours). This is hard when they have already maximised it. Without knowing how they are weighing things, they can look like stick in the muds.
The biggest tell is to question why they believe what they do. If they have a reasonably comprehensive answer, they are likely peak hunters. Stick in the muds generally can’t articulate why their belief is better, outside of common sound bites.
They did eventually participate. While their initial behaviour wasn’t the best, I also understand why they dragged their feet. There was a definite witch hunt going on, for someone to blame. Once that calmed down, they did actually help with investigating it.
Ultimately, it’s of mostly academic interest. Where do we need to tighten down on things to avoid a repeat incident. The best answer would be “Both”.
Also, do you have a link to any papers talking about the man-made origin theory? I’ve not checked in a while, but last time I looked it sent me down a lot of rabbit holes, with nothing ultimately backing it up.
The complication is the double jump.
In the early days of COVID, there were 2 strains spreading. One of those fizzled out and disappeared after a few weeks. Genetically, they seemed to be independent jumps. A single mistake wouldn’t account for this.
It’s also worth noting that the first known infected all spent time in Wuhan wildlife market. They got fairly good tracking from mobile phones, even if the direct evidence was destroyed by the containment/cleaning effort.
Basically, the surrounding evidence doesn’t fit an accidental leak (2 jumps). It doesn’t really fit an intentional release (very geographically focused). It is consistent with it jumping from a sustained infection pool in the market. (Multiple jumps from the same small area at different times).
This is textbook toxic masculinity.
A lot of people misuse the term, but this is an excellent example. The men involved lose out on something amazing due to it being ‘unmanly’.
That’s tempting, and not a hideous price either.
The same way your mortgage is backed up by your house. If you default on your mortgage, the bank can take your house in foreclosure.
Rather than sell shares to raise the money, Musk has backed his borrowing with Tesla shares. Basically, if he doesn’t pay back the loan, the banks get the shares. Unlike houses, shares can change value quite quickly. If the value of the loan exceeds the value of the shares, then the banks start to get VERY nervous. They will call in the loans to get what they can, before things get worse. This could crash the share price further, since they will want to offload the shares as soon as possible.
Musk is extremely rich. However, like most extremely rick people, his money is tied up in shares. If Tesla falls fast enough, he could end up owing more than he has in assets. As soon as his creditors pull the plug, he becomes bankrupt.
https://www.espressif.com/en/news/Response_ESP32_Bluetooth
Espressif released a statement about it. It’s basically a debug function for internal use. It can’t actually do anything you couldn’t do via other means, with that level of access.
Do you have a link to that study? I’d be interested to see what the false positive/negative rates were. Those are the big danger of LLMs being used, and why a trained doctor would be needed.
I believe a good doctor, properly focused, will outperform an AI. AI are also still prone to hallucinations, which is extremely bad in medicine. Where they win is against a tired, overworked doctor with too much on his plate.
Where it is useful is as a supplement. An AI can put a lot of seemingly innocuous information together to spot more unusual problems. Rarer conditions can be missed, particularly if they share symptoms with more common problems. An AI that can flag possibilities for the doctor to investigate would be extremely useful.
An AI diagnostic system is a tool for doctors to use, not a replacement.
To an extent. You are still talking 20-40 degree windows, but triangulation is definitely possible. I’m not sure if it’s used like that however.
There’s definitely a difference between rural and urban requirements.
Analogue goes further, and can tolerate more interference.
Open channels allow others to jump on quickly. E.g. a hunter/hiker listening in, can jump in with critical information on a search and rescue.
Lower density means less people to mess with channels, and generally better radio etiquette.
Open radios are cheaper, and already have the required infrastructure.
Basically, it’s not worth the cost/effort to upgrade. It also provides some extra benefits.