Republicans have traditionally been the party of “regulation doesn’t work, elect me and I can prove it to you”.

Maybe Musk is just taking the logical counter-part to this “regulation doesn’t work, put me in charge of a heavily regulated company and I can prove it to you”.

On what basis would it?

Surely the government is allowed to teach what courses are run in government run schools by government employees in general. I mean, someone has to, and who else would it be?

Or if you’re referring to the religion aspect of the first amendment… this seems religiously neutral?

The constitution doesn’t ban bad governance, just some particularly easy to enumerate forms of it.

The funny thing about religious fundamentalists is their beliefs frequently outright contradict the written word of their religion…

Trying to grant fetuses rights isn’t “supporting pregnancies”, the line to restricting what pregnant people can do, including abortions, is direct and obvious. The fact that the sponsors of the bills have previously passed bills attempting to restrict abortion is a fact.

Supporting pregnancies would be doing things like passing more healthcare funding, better parental leave, literally just giving money to people with kids. That’s not what this bill was about.

Olive oil?

You wouldn’t live long, but compared to the other options you’re listing…

This is just completely untrue. Musk founded SpaceX from nothing, there was no prior entity he acquired or invested in.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_SpaceX

There are lots of legitimate reasons to dislike Musk, there’s really no need to make up lies about him to justify having an extremely low opinion of him.

deleted by creator

Did you know that Pepsi briefly owned 17 submarines, a cruiser, a frigate, and a destroyer?

Edit: On less of a technicality, the East India Company had something like 250k troops back in 1824.

The word “potentially” is doing a lot of work there.

In many cases of piracy, the result of not pirating the work would not have been more income for the rights holder, it would have been the person just not acquiring a copy of the work at all.

Yeah, I don’t know what Colorado’s laws are on this in general, but even if it’s technically legal it seems like a huge risk that someone is going to plausibly allege that given the specific facts denying them time off was race/religion/family status/… discrimination. It might be legal (don’t know), but it’s a stupid policy for a number of reasons.

deleted by creator

The entire paper is already sub-field (AI) in industry (software engineering) specific. No stats are perfect, but I think these ones are pretty damn good for something where peoples role are pretty poorly determined in the first place. Of course you’re welcome to try and find better ones.

The “pure tech” companies I’ve worked at have been roughly equivalent or better than these stats, but at that point I’m sampling from software engineers in general (not having worked at an AI specific company), and my sample is unlikely to be unbiased anyways.

Isn’t the fact that he’s repulsive sort of the whole complaint?

Eh, the gender imbalance is bad, but not 0/12 bad… here are some stats

We should really amend the law to be “and if they incorrectly deny a claim they have to pay 10 times more”. Enough to make it cost more than it’s worth if they do it intentionally, not enough to bankrupt them…

@Yazer The immediate “puzzle” that inspired this complaint was “Conundrum Unsolved” from Pathfinder Wrath of The Righteous

It looks like this article is using @ZLabe 's charts, he posts regularly about this on mastodon, if you’re using the “follow” feature on here (or on a mastodon account) at all I definitely recommend following him.

Satellites go beyond the moon, but not starlink satellites (or any future competing large mesh network of satellites), they are in in low orbit to minimize latency. I haven’t double checked with math or anything but I don’t think they should be high enough to be in sight of much more of the moon than the earth is.

Both “on the earth” and “on the moon” provide about the viewing angle of the sky (a semi-sphere). Unless we’re tracking an object with multiple of these spaced around the earth to get 24/7 recordings the moon doesn’t seem worse…

Even then, with two of these you could put them opposite eachother just barely into the “dark side” (side facing away from earth) of the moon and get nearly 360 degree coverage. You’d have to not literally be on the boundary/leave an earth sized gap in the coverage, but it would be pretty damn close.

The manipulation of the numbers suggests that you just need the right letters in the right order…