did you want explanations for the nuclear fixation or just want to argue? it's a way cooler technology, even if the real world intrudes upon its implementation.
it's not the cost of solar you've got to look at, but the cost of solar + batteries to cover the problem with solar: it doesn't work when the sun isn't shining. Now, that's less of a problem for most of California (it's an issue in snowy Tahoe), and grid-sized energy storage can cover the shortfall, but nuclear fission simply doesn't have that problem. It has other problems instead, which make solar the better choice for California, imo, but not everywhere is LA.
The problem is that by doing that they’ve limited their device’s usefulness severely.
If some kind of killer AR app shows up on the Vision Pro, could it be put on the Quest? Let’s just assume it doesn’t need a level of processing power that the Quest can’t deliver. Would the software vendor just have to implement the entire interface from scratch or with Unity or something? Are there enough platform components on the Quest to be able to do the job?
I don’t know the answer. But I did see a number of developers mentioning online over the last year just how incredibly easy it was to get started with the Vision Pro compared to the quest. If you have a Mac you sign up for the Developer program for $99 and you get an IDE, compiler, simulator, performance monitoring, full UI library plus documentation. It’s early days for some of that stuff, but all the batteries are included. From what they said it was far far easier to get to “hello world” than on Meta’s platform.
>I'd say where the protection starts is that the board is yours. You can make it as open or restricted or curated or nonsensical as you wish. Other individuals can put up their own boards and they can display whatever they wish.
As mentioned in the article, Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins ruling rejected that logic. The government can regulate your conduct. The speech in your bulletin board is that of those who wrote it, not your's. Thus not 1A issue.
The underlying issue is if social media is a platform (like a bulletin board) or a publisher (like a newspaper).
> Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins ruling rejected that logic. The government can regulate your conduct
Pruneyard “was possible because California's constitution contains an affirmative right of free speech which has been liberally construed by the Supreme Court of California, while the federal constitution's First Amendment contains only a negative command to Congress to not abridge the freedom of speech” [1].
If the States win this case, it will be amusing to watch social media sites try to comply with laws banning political censorship in USA also complying with laws in EU mandating political censorship.
It's as if Google believes their higher principle is something other than serving customers and making money. They haven't been able to push out a new successful product in 10+ years. This doesn't bode well for them in the future.
I blame that decade of near zero interest rates. Companies could post record profits without working for them. I think in the coming years we will discover that that event functionally broke many companies.
This comment is peak 2004 neo-conservatives logic.
Ukraine is fighting a bloody attrition land war in Russia. They are currently losing and will likely fair worse as time goes on.
Mind you Ukraine could have prevented all of this if they had decided not to break the Minsk agreement which would have ended the conflict in Donbas. Instead the US and EU used it to buy for time so they could further arm Ukraine for war with Russia.
This conflict has been an unmitigated disaster for the people of Ukraine. Entire generation of youth killed or crippled. Millions fled the country and may never return.
What part of the Minsk agreement did Ukraine break? It seems that LPR, DPR, and UKR all ignored some of the ceasefire agreements and couldn't resist saying that one area or another was an exception that they could seize through military force.
>Mind you Ukraine could have prevented all of this if
Whatever comes after the if, unless it's "surrender sovereignty unconditionally", it's wrong. Putin's goal was, and is now, to incorporate Ukraine into his empire as a client state, similar to Belarus. And eventually to take even that decorative residual bit of sovereignty. Of course at this point, taking over Ukraine will mean mass murder of hundreds of thousands of people and an erasure of Ukrainian identity and language.
Just want you to be clear about what outcome you're defending.
The reason individual speeds were trending down is because the number of users is increasing. Now that the service no longer has wait-lists and is fully available to everyone, one would imagine speeds increasing as more infrastructure is brought online.
A solar plant will produce at full capacity an equivalent of ~5 hours a day.
Nuclear will produce at full capacity for 24/7/365.