So there’s no objective truth? Only opinion?

I believe there have been experiments growing crops under panels. The effect you speak of and the fact that panels, when they have no backing, are translucent can be good for some plants.

Harvesting under structures is difficult though.

Education allows you to reason about what you’re being told and filter out a lot of the bad stuff. It’s not perfect, but it helps you spot egregious “facts” and label the speaker appropriately as untrustworthy.

I think with a lot of these chips geared at AI there’s so much variation in how performance is measured you can say things like it beats an H100 inferencing on a specific INT4 model and that might be true. However, it might only hold for that narrow case.

So press releases aren’t worth much to me. Show me benchmarks.

Maybe just stick to the fire-bending then. Sounds safer.

What’s with Belarus having a schlong?

How dare you use that word!

The US administration are so inconsistent. A few months ago they were cheating AfD on from the sidelines in the election. Now they’re calling them out.

Are the adults slowly starting to gain control?

Does he like tea?

Tally-whacker, schlong, weiner, meat and two veg, purple headed womb ferret.

Alternative headline.

World’s oldest person dies.

None of what I wrote was about passing judgement.

I agree that once you do you lose your objective foundation. However saying that something has never happened before, or it’s being justified under emergency powers, or that something is a factually incorrect statement is not opinion.

I don’t see how Huawei could have made that jump. There’s a lot of generational knowledge and software development behind Nvidia’s chips. No company can become a competitor first time.

Spain managed to run …

Nobody ran anything that day. It was a mega-siesta.

I’d have expected overproduction to push the frequency up anyhow.

Pretty much anything over 10,000 employees. You can’t really organise that many people in a productive way. Let’s face it… You’re exploiting something.

My problem with the BBC is the reporting is so hyper-conservative that the plot of Mars Attacks would be:

• US president to welcome martian delegation
• Talks break down with Martian representatives
• Skirmishes break our across Nevada

All factually correct but nothing that says that WE’RE UNDER ATTACK BY INVADERS FROM ANOTHER PLANET. I’m not looking for hyperbole, just some context on the story.

Under the Tories the BBC would constantly say “X said the sky is yellow” and leave it at that. It’s totally impartial to say “X incorrectly states that the sky is yellow”. It’s factually wrong and not saying that looks to many like tacit endorsement of the statement. Similarly with Trump, he’s taking actions that are unheard of in American history. The BBC will just say what he’s doing and not how exceptional it is, making it seem like just another Monday. It validates his actions.

Only when you’re already in a hospital when the injury happens.

Probably quite an easy decision though.

It’s known to melt witches in seconds.