In real life I think a similar situation holds. First we have to make a distinction between a system having randomness; a completely unpredictable outcome and being chaotic; where the outcome is theoretically predictable but varies significantly with even tiny changes in input.

Yes, thank you for putting it so nicely into words. I was already aware of that distinction.

I’m studying physics right now and trying to organize my thoughts around that. I remember we talked about some mechanical contraption that exhibits non-deterministic (i.e. purely random) behavior due to the equations of motion having non-unique solution. If I remember correctly, it was a kind of “knife standing on its tip right at the edge of a cliff”-edge condition. There’s two solutions to that: It stands still or it falls down. There’s two distinctly different solutions because the equations of motion are non-continuous, i.e. even for the tiniest change in position, the net force changes from 0 to 1g.

Apart from that, there’s some more “pure random” stuff that I’m investigating into right now, like quantum stuff (as you mentioned). But there’s at least one more example that I’d like to think about:

A human/robot cannot fully predict their own future. That is because if they could, they could become aware of it and decidedly act against it. For example, if I predict that I will eat an avocado tomorrow, I might stop myself from doing that. So the prediction becomes wrong. In a certain sense, therefore one cannot predict their own actions. This isn’t due to a lack in accuracy, but it’s fundamentally impossible. I guess. Let me hear your thoughts! Your words are calm and collected; you seem to know stuff.

Btw, off topic; do you believe in true randomness? In other words, do you think that certain physics processes simply have an unpredictable outcome? (I’m asking because your response implies “No”, but I believe it is “yes”.)

Solar panels are the natural photosynthetic plants turned into technology.

Let’s see how things unfold.

Datacenter environmental impact is a short-term problem.

In ten years, we’ll have significant renewable energy disposable.

that makes sense, yeah

trickle down is when i piss on thatcher’s grave

I’m not sure whether having deterministic behavior is a core characteristic of robots, but if so, I highly doubt that it makes a lot of sense to see me as a robot, because my behavior sure is random!

How many years before robots will take over the economy and rule the world?

it’s an element in the vector space that is spanned by the functions (x -> x^n) for every n in N.

Alternatively, it’s every function that can be constructed using only the fundamental functions + and •, and constants.

There’s one more outlier though which is Electrochemical cell, like galvanic element or voltaic pile

It was used around 1800 as a major electricity source, but I guess it quickly became uneconomical in 1866 or sth when the dynamo was invented.

Edit: wait yes, it actually says this in the second paragraph of the linked article:

The entire 19th-century electrical industry was powered by batteries related to Volta’s (e.g. the Daniell cell and Grove cell) until the advent of the dynamo (the electrical generator) in the 1870s.

So, I don’t know why you’re taking a stand for Uranium today. It used to be a good technology 30 years ago, but today it just doesn’t make any sense anymore.

First factor is cost. Renewables (Solar + Wind especially) have really really gone down in cost (see this link and this link), and the population will favor the energy source that is cheaper in the long run.

Secondly, the environmental impact of solar is really not that big. When we talk about how much CO2 solar produces, it’s mostly because that solar needs silicon and that needs energy to be purified. And that energy mostly comes from coal, gas or other non-renewables today. But guess what, as the solar revolution progresses, that emission goes down as well, so solar actually becomes more environmentally friendly over time.

tbf, we have airplanes, but most goods are still being transported over lands or seas.

Well but they’re not around anymore because the uranium inside them is all consumed by now, right?

computer people don’t do sports --> muscle atrophy --> slim --> already looks more like a girl --> easy to transition

but yes, it is also correct :D

I have held this stance for many years (am not American though), and everytime I proposed it someone from the US told me “Nooo we’ve had that in the past and we fought a civil war in order to stay together!!! We can’t split!” and I think it’s like a broken marriage that was never easy to begin with that’s just being held together because the parties are too stubborn to say “ok well let’s split up”. It’s an unhealthy relationship.

So if you wanna know my personal story, I was given the feeling that even looking at a girl directly was sexual harassment, when I was 12 years old.

Now do 1+1 and figure out why Gen Z is “timid, self-conscious neurotic”. And I say it again, human contact is essential for mental wellbeing, as humans are incredibly social creatures. Yes, contact without physical contact is not to be considered proper contact.

So I guess you all have girlfriends, then?

Wait, is this satire? I only noticed 3/4 through the article.