Robotics (or more broadly mechatronics) is a super interesting field. To do the work at the mechanical/electrical interface is really hard.

The field of industrial controls skips the hard part and just buys stuff that is pre-designed to move. Then those pre-designed pieces are made to fit and work together. It’s like complicated Legos and is honestly very fun and rewarding.

If you want to do programming with a physical result, controls engineering is a great option. I would recommend shooting for the hard stuff (real programming - DSP, FPGA, etc) knowing you’ve got a safe fallback with industrial controls (PLC programming).

Some states have anti-gerrimandering written into their constitutions, so that would not be easy.

I’m not really sure what you’re asking or getting at. Could you be more explicit?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium_recycling

Aluminium recycling is the process in which secondary commercial aluminium is created from scrap or other forms of end-of-life or otherwise unusable aluminium.[1] It involves re-melting the metal, which is cheaper and more energy-efficient than the production of virgin aluminium by electrolysis of alumina (Al2O3) refined from raw bauxite by use of the Bayer and Hall–Héroult processes.

Recycling scrap aluminium requires only 5% of the energy used to make new aluminium from the raw ore.[2]

Cans and glass are infinitely recyclable. Recycling aluminum saves 96% of the energy of producing new.

Paper is semi recyclable, but it degrades, so it can only go through the process a certain number of times.

Plastic is marginally recyclable. Only about 10% of plastic that goes into a recycling bin gets recycled. It was a hoax by petro-chem to make plastic seem more sustainable than it is.

Luckily Lemmy isn’t that popular yet. (Plus we’re all poor.)

What is the other meaning of undead?

I agree, LLMs have the amazingly human ability to bumble into the right answer even if they don’t know why.

It seems to me that a good analogy of our experience is a whole bunch of LLMs optimized for different tasks that have some other LLM scheduler/administrator for the lower level models that is consciousness. Might be more layers deep, but that’s my guess with no neurological or machine learning background.

This is a cool take! I don’t think I agree though. I assume we developed pattern recognition before music/language. Many animals have the ability to note attributes about plants and animals even without the ability to communicate complex ideas (ie language or oral tradition). I assume that type of pattern recognition was a good blueprint for functions like music and language, but my guess is it started from a general pattern recognition, then was retuned for music and language.

Again, pure speculation, but there is some logic behind it!

This seems reasonable to me, a very unqualified source in neurology.

I think the goal should be slow continuous growth. It’s a social media tool and that requires enough engaged users so it doesn’t feel dead. As you pointed out, we’re not there yet. I also think a huge jump in new users would be detrimental. Without central leadership of traffic and hardware Lemmy requires longer to respond to changes in user load. Nothing would be more detrimental to adding long term engaged users than an influx of new users that caused infrastructure overloading.

We’re very spoiled with reliability these days. People are not interested in unreliable access to their doom scrolling (myself included, unfortunately).

“…they [Infowars] strive to make life both scarier and longer for everyone, a commendable goal.”

What a fantastic read.

Are there any foundations that distribute donations to various FOSS projects?

It’s a monarchy… So yeah…

Is this the same Bob Ballard that found the Titanic and the Bismark?

I agree, we all have search engines and if someone doesn’t understand a word or phrase they can learn it on their own. Brilliant write up!

This is the way.

Command statement = an action

Question statement = a status

It is a politically savvy and ethically correct move. Really nice when those line up.

The argument I’m making is that we should not call them chemicals when they don’t have the capacity to make chemical reactions.

An analogy could be how we use the word weed. We call unwanted plants weeds. If there is mint growing in your yard and you don’t want it, it’s a weed. If you sell your house and the next owner likes it that mint is not a weed anymore. It’s still mint (element) but no longer a weed (chemical).

You make a good point. I should have said “things in the plasma state” should not be considered chemicals.