This energy would then be transmitted to one or more stations on Earth. It is then converted to electricity and delivered to the energy grid or batteries for storage.

How is the energy transmitted to Earth?

I found the intro hook intriguing, but the reporting starts with a lot of media clips and other run-ups, which eventually made me leave.

It’s great they put in so much effort into genuine, on-site reporting, but the already long video report feels even more bloated/filled this way.

I have to wonder if the DMCA was due to the news clips. While they may be fair use for contextualized reporting, I didn’t find them particularly valuable, and DMCA issues could have been avoided without them or without using so many of them.

No, as per the article, their argumentation is that they are not web crawlers generating an index, they are user-action-triggered agents working live for the user.

Why did you link an image instead of the video?

Very often. I regularly consciously do not post comments, or write something and then don’t post it.

I think you could call it self-regulation, though. It’s better we don’t always share everything in every situation.

What does hit hard mean? Does it have to be emotionally impactful? Is positively surprised enough?

• Sheepy has great atmosphere (free)
• Halloween Hidden Capybaras with Orange and Pumpkins has great atmosphere, looks great (free)

I remember a game I played a long time ago touched me, but I can’t find my review of it.

I found the VR title Surge was great, but it doesn’t seem to be available in the Steam store anymore. I sat down and watched and looked around, and the music and visuals had great impact.

I don’t see any possibility of that based on the physics I know of and my understanding.

for example, “have seen revenues jump from zero to $20 million in a year,” he said. “It’s because they pick one pain point, execute well, and partner smartly with companies who use their tools,” he added.

Sounds like they were able to sell their AI services. That doesn’t really measure AI success, only product market success.

Celebrating a revenue jump from zero, presumably because they did not exist before, is… quite surprising. It’s not like they became more efficient thanks to AI.

I’m confused by the article suddenly changing to seemingly other semi-related topics and pieces.

I was gifted crypto from two crypto projects for my (crypto-unrelated) open source work. It was a baffling hassle to pay out. Over multiple conversions and significant gas fees and waiting for hours for a transaction and having to juggle wallets and exchange platform service… yeah. From my experience, cryptocurrencies are not feasible for normal, regular payments.

There’s no better payment infrastructure for USDT than for €. It adds additional concerns and technical complexities.

DNS is a listing of address resolution. Ignoring/Dropping records is not modifying existing entries/mappings. That’s a different thing in my eyes.

If the ruling were to declare published content must not be modified, I think there’s multiple levels to it too, and it may dictate to any degree between them.

1. Interpretative tools (like a screen reader would be, or forced high contrast mode), which may be classified accessibility too
2. CSS hacks that change display style but not what is shown (for example forcing a dark mode, reduced spacing, or bigger font sizes)
3. CSS hacks or ad blockers that modify or hide content (block ads that would otherwise be rendered)

The biggest danger for a “copyright violation” would be the last point. Given that styling is part of the website though, “injection with intent to modify” may very well be part of it too, though.

It certainly would go directly against the open web with all of its advantages.

/edit: Comment by manxu, who read the ruling, is a lot less alarming.

• Who is publishing it? How trustworthy are they? What’s their track record? What’s their funding and goals?
• What’s the source? Can I verify the source? Do I need to or to what degree does it fit other information I sighted or assessed previously?
• Who is supporting the information? Experts of the field? Of long investment? Or far-fetched or arbitrary people that may not have any expertise, may not have fundamentally verified their own information and biases, or are not trustworthy for other reasons?
• How recent is the information? Is there even legitimacy or urgency in giving it attention right now? Is there on-site documentation? Official analysis reports or scientific studies? Of what quality, by whom, with what on-site expertise?

Something like that.

For stuff I’m not sure of or unknowing I often check Wikipedia, which links further sources, or actually check court rulings, or laws, or state published information, etc. Having watched many documentaries and having read articles gives some assessment basis for various related topics. Watching or reading from independent invested journalists, especially when they go/went on-site, gives (reasonably) verifiable legitimacy.

As for your friend, it also depends on how much you are willing to invest. Nudging with questions like “don’t you feel it’s suspiciously positive?” or dropping some information like “he was bankrupt multiple times, why is he celebrated as saving the economy? doesn’t that seem off?”

If they’re open to other sources and information, it’ll be easy. More likely, they are not, which will make it harder and a longer process if you’re willing to invest. Factual information often doesn’t help. Making them question stuff themselves would be the best way then.

Perplexity argues that a platform’s inability to differentiate between helpful AI assistants and harmful bots causes misclassification of legitimate web traffic.

So, I assume Perplexity uses appropriate identifiable user-agent headers, to allow hosters to decide whether to serve them one way or another?

No smoking. Pretty much only schnapps after meals with my grandma - doing it for her.

I’m working in a small software development company. We’re exploring AI. It’s not being pushed without foundation.

There’s no need to commit when you don’t even know what you’re committing to, disregarding cost and risk. It just doesn’t make sense. We should expect better from CEOs than emotionally following a fear of missing out without a reasonable assessment.

I’ve never seen anyone hate on forgejo.

and it has fewer large fluctuations now, it seems.

106 to 76 to 120 in the last four months is not large fluctuation? 30 % variance is quite high to me.

You say forgetting memories is proof or indicative that memory depends on the physical body. But isn’t that true for conscious as well?

Our conscious is inherently bound to our physical being. We see, we feel, we taste, we identify with our body. Our brain allows us to think, and experience, to conceptualize our body, our being, us as an entity.

We cut off fingernails and discard them as no longer part of ourselves. We drive a car and internalize movement as if it were us moving, while not seeing the vehicle as part of ourselves.

Without experiencing and without a body to conceptualize, what would our consciousness be? Without a body and mind where consciousness can arise from experience and thoughts, how could consciousness arise?

Chicken Soup for the Soul

An English book of short stories.

But what we find is that it’s not just that this content spreads; it also shapes the network structures that are formed. So there’s feedback between the effective emotional action of choosing to retweet something and the network structure that emerges. And then in turn, you have a network structure that feeds back what content you see, resulting in a toxic network. The definition of an online social network is that you have this kind of posting, reposting, and following dynamics. It’s quite fundamental to it. That alone seems to be enough to drive these negative outcomes.

Trying to grasp it in my own words;

Because social networks are about interactions and networks (follows, communities, topics, instances), they inherently human nature establish toxic networks.

Even when not showing content through engagement-based hot or active metrics, interactions will push towards networking effects of central players/influencers and filter and trigger bubbles.

If there were no voting, no followable accounts or communities, it would not be a social network anymore (by their definition).