wosat

I get that it's trendy to bash Elon, but he has always said that X would attempt to follow local laws:

By “free speech”, I simply mean that which matches the law. I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law. If people want less free speech, they will ask government to pass laws to that effect. Therefore, going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people.

He has pushed back on countries who attempt to push their censorship dictates on the world -- hence, why many of the account suspensions are only in effect within Turkey:

Some accounts appear to be suspended only in Turkey and not in the rest of the world.

Larger question: Why is Elon/X getting more flak than the authoritarian douchebag -- Erdoğan -- and his cronies in the judiciary who are censoring and jailing political opponents?

And what if 50% of people want to read what you consider hateful drivel?

In what I'm sure is totally unrelated news, South Korea's work force is predicted to shrink by half in the next 50 years.

I suspect there is at least one engineer who voiced concerns months or years ago, was not listened to, and is now having an "I told you so" moment.

Exactly! Back in the day, you had two options: (1) subscribe or (2) buy a single magazine or newspaper. Now, there's no equivalent to the newsstand for digital media.

To be clear, Google will still be storing copies of the pages they crawl. They just won't be making those copies available to end users.

Microsoft tried to shanghai me to the "new outlook". When I realized the scope of what they were trying to do, under the guise of a simple software update, I was floored. I don't even think Google, with all of their Borg-ish tendencies, would attempt such a blatant hijacking of user data. The privacy implications are profound.

This situation seems analogous to when air travel started to take off (pun intended) and existing legal notions of property rights had to be adjusted. IIRC, a farmer sued an airline for trespassing because they were flying over his land. The court ruled against the farmer because to do otherwise would have killed the airline industry.

While this is amazing and all, it's always seemed to me that this approach of using hundreds of laser beams focused on a single point would never scale to be viable for power generation. Can any experts here confirm?

I've always assumed this approach was just useful as a research platform -- to learn things applicable to other approaches, such as tokamaks, or to weapons applications.

It amazes me that there are so many people who buy a printer, are offered this "pay $x a month for Y pages" type of plan, and say yes. I mean, sure, HP sucks, but they wouldn't be able to get away with such slimy business practices if there weren't so many people willing to pay.

Looking at this, I was sure it was depicting the Sagrada Familia Cathedral in Spain, but after doing some searching, it looks like the resemblance is just a coincidence.

I'm with you. Also, it seems like it would be much more efficient to do carbon capture at the source, where the fuel is being used, like a power plant, where the concentrations are relatively high, compared to atmospheric capture where CO2 is less than 0.1%.