It’s such a tired line. You know what everyone finds creepy, people who don’t respect your personal boundaries and don’t understand basic concepts of consent. Neither Money nor looks can make up for that in the slightest.
It’s such a tired line. You know what everyone finds creepy, people who don’t respect your personal boundaries and don’t understand basic concepts of consent. Neither Money nor looks can make up for that in the slightest.
I can’t say I know what I’d do if I were in your situation. But many people throughout history have chosen to write those books, and they have suffered for that choice, but they have also driven change.
Care to explain your point with some detail?
If this fails, I doubt we’ll see a second proposal. So I think it would be fair to measure any arguments you make as why no action is better than the proposal.
Correct me if I am wrong, but this petition doesn’t decide the wording of any law just ensures it is brought to attention of EU lawmakers and discussed right?
Things change slowly then all at once.
Which is to say, the older generations are very set in their ways, but the new generations can be completely different.
You say you can write a book, maybe you should. Detail all the things you see and don’t like. Give me a voice to the people who think like you.
No, I am not sure that I am.
Photonic processing, whilst very cool and super exciting, is not a quantum thing… Maxwells equations are exceedingly classical.
As for the rest it’s transistor design optimisation, enabled predominantly by materials science and ASMLs EUV tech I guess:), but still exploits the same underlying ‘quantum 1.0’ physics.
Spintronics (which could be what you mean by 2D) is for sure in-between (1.5?), leveraging spin for low energy compute.
Quantum 2.0 is systems exploiting entanglement and superposition - i.e. qubits in a QPU (and a few quantum sensing applications).
[radioactive decay triggered the poison gas?]
[Quantum hype train?]
[Imposter syndrome?]
Good question. It would be application specific. I think evanescencnt wave coupling in EM radiation is considered " very classical" (whatever that actually means). But utilizing wave particle duality for tunneling devices is past quantum 1.0 (1.5 maybe?). However, superconductivity tunneling in Josephson junctions in a SQUID is closer to quantum 1.0, but 2.0 if used to generate entangled states for superconducting qbits for quantum computing.
Clear as mud right?
Can we trade?
Oh my sweet summer child, a 100x yes, if only it were possible.
But more seriously, if you’re doing EE, the world of quantum is your oyster. Specialize in RF/MW design and implementation, we use it for qubit control, and you’ll be highly valuable.
Quantum Physics Postdoc here. Although technically correct this is also somewhat misleading. You need the band structure of solids, which is due to quantization and Pauli exclusion principle. The same quantum mechanics that explains why we did those strange electron energy levels for atoms in highschool. The majority of quantum mechanics, however, is not required: coherence, spin, entanglement, superposition. In the field we describe semiconductors as quantum 1.0, and devices that use entanglement and superposition (i.e. a quantum computer) as quantum 2.0, and smear everything else in-between. This
I mean you last line sums it up, If on your balance you can weight the sum total of human systematic logical effort against your anecdotal experience then what is the point of discussion at all?
And you want to know when that looks really ugly? When the faithful see things like “the light and hope brought by faith” and are blind to rivers of blood and human suffering that have not ceased to this day enabled and perpetuated by faith.
It doesn’t matter if there is a god, by the things done in God’s name the concept of faith must be reject for humanities sake.
The entitlement of some people the moment they have a car. “Somebody took 20min of my time, they literally deserve 5 years in jail and to be assaulted in public.”. You’re sick, nothing your doing is important, sit in traffic and seeth. If you don’t like it, take the train.
Also a physicist, and I can confirm that we are all as dumb as rocks.
You’re right, it doesn’t at all capture how disturbing the reality is.
Ignored privacy settings; unknown third parties can train AI models on data scrapped from private images and video host on common social media platforms.
Just latex to svg your math for impress.
For real though, it’s such a miss for impress to not have in line math
Not quite correct, if I remember correctly dry soil adsorbs more water and quicker (by default) than waterlogged soil. But when is been dry for a long time a hydrophobic film forms, causing a temporary delay in water adsorption. I think it can impact flash flooding, but it washes off fairly quickly and then adsorption returns to expected.
I’m not going back arch/bazzite to try this. For two reasons, 1. I can’t enable those things, my hardware doesn’t support reBAR. And 2. My issue sounds potentially different. I could load and run the game, but it would crash regularly. Realistically, if this is the issue my only solution is to roll back to an old kernel (not supported in arch), and I’m not sure if that fly’s in bazzite either. Distro hoping to Mint is then a great solution, even if I didn’t take a rational path there.
I run fedora 40 on my work laptop, and I am blow away at how capable Wayland+gnome is for plug and go multiple monitor support. You could never have done it with X, every meeting you’d want 15min to make sure you can share your screen.
Oh yeh good catch.
I can’t do resizable bar, so it would have been a kernel regression to fix (if that was the issue). I think patched in next release. Although I never got any error messaging in any logs that i could see :(
The nice thing about the deck, at least from an outsiders perspective, is that everyone’s got the more or less same hardware. If you have an issue most likely someone else has the same issue, and already has a fix that’ll work for you.
Well your first statement is a subtle strawman. Ross said this way is the only way, because no one else is trying, not that it was the right way.
Secondly, fallacy fallacy, just because it’s a false dichotomy doesn’t mean it’s not also correct. Can anyone just start up another initiative now? Not technically, but practically. Or would any serious attempt just join this movement to add to the momentum. Then if this fails, when can another attempt be made, how long till the ‘political will’ burnt by this campaign is regenerated?