Or you could bury humans there too. You just need to replenish the organic matter for the trees to use to grow. The old millions of years ago way to do that was to just have things die on the land. Burying human mixed slurry into the soil, having bacteria, food waste, and so on could all feed the soil.

The three main fuels needed that sunlight isn't going to provide is Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium and they need particular formulation so that root based bacteria can feed on them and forward it into the root as required. Less needed is sulfur, magnesium, and calcium, it's kind of dependent on the type of tree we're growing and what are target growth is. The trace stuff within trees like boron, iron, manganese, zinc, chloride, copper, and molybdenum will come by just nature of being outside. Like maybe the zinc and chloride will get stripped in a few generations, but bleeding animals provides more than enough of these trace elements and in the form required to supply an entire forest. Having deer and well wormed soil will easily keep these trace elements in constant supply.

The top three are the biggest concerns because it requires the largest amounts. Things need to regularly die within the forest to keep these in healthy amounts. The manner by which they are delivered can be altered by selective breeding or genetic engineering. So you can change HOW they get these requirements, but you'll always have the NEED for these.

But all my ideas usually include some plan for human slurry. I think it's a great way to do something with dead bodies rather than putting them in graveyards so that their loved ones can forget to visit. And human bodies have a ton of nutrients required for plant life in tons of the various forms required by the fixing agents. I've just never understood why we do the whole grave thing, it's incredibly wasteful.

Nah you are getting that confused. You're right in that they emu x86. They're confusingly calling a x86_64 only machine x86S. No emu, all long mode and that it's. So IA32e as that emu is called, that's there but only ring3. Actual IA32e ring0 would be dropped in x86S. So you can't do system code in ring0 even on a 64b OS that allowed such, the hardware would just simply not be there any longer to support those instructions.

You are right about IA32e, but this stuff is different than that. This would completely remove 32b at ring0 and leave it only at ring3.

And this is how one knows that you aren't quite up to speed with what is going on in Intel. x86S is Intel's pitch to do exactly what you indicate. And you can find the current spec and what OSes and firmware need to be doing to reach x86S operations.

Obviously them only pitching this in 2023 may be a bit late to the game. But Intel sees that dropping the old real and extended mode as the only way forward for simplifying design. But Intel is very much so heading in this direction, but one doesn't go down this road lightly.

If they have access to those things. That's a massive assumption given that there's a growing gap between those who do and don't have access to those things.

No they don't. Lower income brackets are routinely undergoing emergency treatment as opposed to preventive. That's literally a sure fire sign of that being an untrue statement for low income brackets. How many rich people being narcamed on the side of the street versus lower income folks? How many lower income people eating diets that are driving them into the ground faster? Like there's a ton of very demonstrable objective things that indicate this statement has no basis in reality.

Many, many moons ago, I had a job working with a material research group. They were using Gaussian software to model something, something chemistry (not exactly my field). Where I came in was building a cluster of systems that was using the Linda software package from Gaussian to run on multiple machines. The output would then be rendered on their fancy SGI Indigo boxes.

Very long story short. I had come into the lab one evening to change over tapes and grab the ones for offsite. One of the researchers was still there in the lab and I decided to chat them up a bit as I headed out. To my surprise they were blowing foam and using Great Value Grape Juice for some part of it. I have no idea what role it played but the researcher had tried all kinds of other juices and found that GV Grape Juice was best for whatever it was that it was good for.

I left with a box of tape and two containers of half used Welch's Juice.

Some of them do use all kinds of random stuff for their experiments.

Also the head researcher had a SGI Octane machine and a Power Mac G3. I think his Octane machine made me insanely jealous of how nice IRIX looked at the time.

How do we prove this if all of them aren't yet there? This is the weirdest comment I've read in all of this. That's like saying nine year olds will live even longer than current 90 year olds. How do you even go about proving such a claim? And it's not wise to use "well more of them made it to X age than the previous generation made it to X age, because that completely ignores the possibility of a cliff to drop off at some future point. For all we know, most Gen X have livers that are ticking time bombs and there's a massive bust when they hit middle to late 60s.

There are just zero ways anyone can make this kind of statement and it be any reasonable percent accurate.

The government is actually doing something proactive? Color me surprised. Clearly there's either going to be abuse or some political party will call it fear mongering and completely defund it two years before we're all wondering where to bury all the people infected with H5N1.

We don't want an open model, we don't want open infrastructure. We want very rich businesses.

I mean, I really enjoy AI and I'm a big supporter of it. But Sam Altman is a greedy ass bastard and every statement he utters should be treated to that end. He honestly believes that his team is the sole group of human beings on this planet that have the ability to "guide" us with AI. In relation to this point he mentions.

ICANN doesn't do any innovation on the Internet. I have no idea why Altman brings this up outside of pointing at something that has just tangential relationship to the innovation on the Internet. And that aside, an ICANN like body wouldn't slow a nation-state build up of AI or be disruptive of such. Sort of how ICANN doesn't do anything about the Chinese firewall.

Sure why not. We're doing it for fucking banks, telecos, farming conglomerates, oil, and so forth. Shit, why not just add another to the list? Surely everyone understands the sarcasm I'm attempting to hit here. Private-public ventures are how we get behemoths like Boeing. There's pros and cons to that, but I think the vast majority of Americans are pretty tired of the monopoly but it's not a monopoly that so many American industries are already at.

Yes, please make owning some software illegal. But if Disney owns it, then we are Kosher. I fucking hate Altman. I'm tired of techbros ruining everything tech related. Yes, we get it Sam. You wish Microsoft had made running other OSes on Intel illegal. You wish actual open AI projects weren't a thing. You don't want innovation from the public, just from your team.

How about under something like GPLv3 but with some AI modifications? Oh wait, no that would mean it would be harder for you to make money off of the product if everyone had to release details about models and what not. Silly me.

I fully support AI into the hands of the people. I think AI will become a tool that is critical to particular industries much like how Photoshop or CGI has become for print media and movies respectively. However Altman is a cancer and he has only one goal. To enrich himself at the cost of anything and everything. And that is because he believes with a near religious fervor, that he alone really understands AI. That he alone can guide us all through this democratic vision for AI. He is so fucking full of himself that he is an absolute danger to anything and everything he advocates. I shit you all not, Sam Altman is the absolute last person anyone should be taking advice from for AI.

We do not need nuclear power plants and billions of server farms. What we need is innovation within the algorithms themselves. We need optimizations in the full pipeline of every neural network. We need open discussions and tools in the hands of everyone and anyone who wants it. We don't need massive server farms, all that does is ensure that anyone reliant on AI is beholden to the owners of those networks. We need AI that can run in the palm of our hands, AI that can be openly tinkered with, AI that empowers the individual not the nation-state.

If we need nuclear power plants, then we need them for power generation for EVs, for electric rail, for removing fossil fuels from our needed energy mixture. We do not need power plants for the warehouses of computers that Mr. Altman dreams of owning one day. We need them for the people. That's what Sam Altman forgets, that's what he shrugs away as insignificant. The people of this planet, all of them, should be the ones entrusted with AI, not just a select few from Altman's list of choice friends. Sam Altman seeks to remove this tool from the everyday man and lock it behind a software subscription. Fuck that guy.

This doesn't make any sense because there are new humans that enter into the domain of buying cars that did not previously have a car, like all the people who turned 16 or whatever driving age we want to pick in the time between 2014 and today. That's quite a few million people in that ten year time span. What happen? All of them just bought gram-grams car?

And the thing is while cars are indeed more durable. There is strictly speaking less buyers period in the new car market. We know economic models (and I'm going to summarize here, so can we not do the split hairs thing?) can have buyer and seller markets. The car industry in general is in a seller's market by every indicator. That puts the favor in used cars. And the number one driver for a seller's market is the price point. When you can capture a top dollar from an asset resold rather new, that's what you do. It's easier to slip into that, you already have the car, you just need to sell it.

Yes the durability is a thing. It's dictating the selection of inventory. But the consumers are aligned with the price tag that comes with the vehicles. That's what dictates the market we see. And consumers are looking for deals and savings because of their strapped wallets. $25k for base model KIA that's not an EV, that's the annual salary for a lot of people. And you can see people struggling with that price point....

Like I think I would buy the durability argument more if seven to nine year car loans weren't becoming more popular options for folks. They are obviously trying to get people into a monthly payment that doesn't break their budget. There's a number your average customer is walking into a dealership inside their head, and they're not having it if it goes over that value. A nine year car loan on a $25k car, is a very low monthly payment. That's what is important to that consumer that they would enter into nine LONG years of payments and the massive amount of interest they'll be paying.

Except this logic doesn't fly when used car loans are on seven year terms. You're paying vastly more and getting WAY less. BOA has fucking 84 month loans for USED CARS. There are zero ways you're convincing me it is a durability thing. 84 months. Do you realize how much interest that is?! They're not getting a "pretty decent car" they're driving off that lot underwater, by like A LOT.

Just no. Your argument holds water if used cars were still under things like three to five year loans. But that is distinctly NOT what anyone is seeing. This is why people are worried we're enter into a used car loan bubble. Just absolutely NO, there's no sense in that the sole driver is durability. The market makes no sense if you apply only that logic.

Running out of customers period.

The average age of a car on the road is at the highest it has ever been since keeping records. Average hit 12 years old in the United States. That means there's people keeping them longer and there are some that are newer than 12 years, but average car that you run into on the streets wasn't even produced this decade.

People are just not buying cars. The US population's income has steadily gone down and there's economic ramifications if just a select number of people in the United States are absorbing the majority of the new wealth created. Restaurants are dying, motorcycles are dying, new cars are dying, and this is just going to keep going for as long as the United States keeps underpaying their citizens. I mean it's pretty simple logic here. If customers have no money to buy at your business, your business isn't going to last very long.

It is clear that there's very little interest in actually helping the United States economy from lawmakers. When companies are posting multi-billion dollar profits and buy back options, and consumer good purchases are shrinking, someone is getting all the new made wealth and someone isn't. This story is just another to add to the pile of Reaganomics distinctly NOT working.

I mean look at your comment.

The number of people in that bracket, the number of people who are "your average new car buyer", that number has deceased over the years. There are now fewer absolute number of people in the new car market. Be it an EV or not. And you see markets trying to claw people into that market via insane methods like 84-month and 96-month car loan terms. They're literally creating ticking time bombs just to keep the absolute number of people in the new car market artificially up.

None of this stuff is happening in isolation, people just DO NOT HAVE MONEY. It is this simple. When nobody has money, nobody buys shit. The end. Thank you all for coming to my TED Talk. All of this is the creation of a few people who just absolutely do not want one cent of their horde of gold to slip through their fingers.

Yes. It is.

They've released a work around for the matter.

* Boot into safe mode or the Windows Recovery Environment.

* Navigate to C:\Windows\System32\drivers\CrowdStrike

* Locate the file that matches "C-00000291*.sys" for your machine. Delete that file.

* Reboot machine

Directions from the TA posted on the matter by Crowdstrike Someone from Twitter posting a screenshot of the TA

I would say someone is getting fired, but someone is going to be answering to Congress soon enough.

I will tell you the thing that killed it that at least five of the old Windows Phone owners indicated. Google continually killing YouTube on the devices. Lots of Google services would go dark on the devices randomly because of some sort of spat. Google killed WP more than anyone else.

As for the device kickbacks. Apple didn't need 3rd party kickbacks, vendors were begging for iPhones at any rate that Apple would drip the devices to them. That said, Apple was absolutely ensuring that Lumia 950 was the last time that anyone put out a device that shamed their cameras. One of the killer features of the Nokia Windows Phones were their cameras were way ahead of the game at the time.

Bull fucking SHIT. Thunderbird and Firefox both suffer massively from the legacy of Netscape's giant push to jump on the distributed object model that was on fire at the time with COM and CORBA.

As someone who does a lot of C++, define proper. STL? Boost? C++11, C++17, shoot why not C++23, constexpr, template metaprogramming... I'm all ears to hear someone say what the official blessed way to do things are. Smart pointers all the way? Default deletors or custom? Refactor code to have move semantics or leave the copy in place and go for more granular memory allocation? Should we toss in some concepts too? You know that's new hotness right now.

Every single thing you have said about this project is an absolute you pulled it out your goddamn ass. You should instead listen to people who have actually worked on the various old Netscape and rebrand Mozilla projects.

Oh then it should be super simple for the "engineers" to start fabricating in the US at the level of TSMC. How's that going?

The US wanted to make money without the haggle of labor and lost in the process the lead to command the industry.

Maybe that's why the US has TSMC building facilities within the US because that way all the "engineers" can help out.

Even more interesting is Burn-Jeng Lin who developed immersion lithography, you know that stuff the US "invented" and the Dutch produce the machine, is from OH LOOK, Taiwan. Funny that.

Sure