The title doesn't match the article, and it's also not true. The term may have become more widespread after the 2013 book mentioned in the article, but it certainly existed prior to it.

Do we know that we don't see adverse health effects on those populations? I couldn't find any studies on the subject. I think it would be very hard to measure, since you can't really compare without comparing populations of different countries, and at that point any effects can be attributed to a myriad of differences between countries.

"That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape, than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long & generally approv’d"

The amount of damage these cameras have caused is totally disproportional to whatever meager benefit they may have wrought. These are antisocial machines.

The first word of UBI is universal. The entire concept relies on that characteristic.

I think the distinction is important in this case specifically because it shows us that he has no strong conviction towards doing so. He knows it's wrong and does it anyways, it's worse.

This is not my experience at all with Facebook. Since six months ago or so, Facebook is saying my three option are to pay them a subscription, accept tracking, or not use their products. I went with option three, but my reading of the GDPR as that it's illegal for them to ask me to make this choice.

I'm in Spain, this is probably not the same worldwide.

What would be properly recycling electronics, if not extracting the metals? should the worthless based board to be melted and used for bottles?

Not burning all the ICs and all the other components that still work perfectly fine would be a good start imo.

That would fall under Reuse rather than Recycle. Reduce, Reuse and Recycle are in the order of best to worst. Recycling is the last ditch effort to not completely waste something. It's always going to feel like a half measure, because it is.

I would say reusing a "disposable" vape would be refilling it and recharging or exchanging the battery, not salvaging it for parts.

To do WHAT with? Catalog and categorize the millions of random penny-priced ICs that MIGHT be usable for something else?

That there is no way to recycle electronics economically is the reason that they are not recycled. I don't claim otherwise.

Isn't that the point of recycling? To reuse the reusable materials like plastic?

If salvaging 100% of the materials that make up something is the only way to "properly" recycle, we are not recycling anything properly. Some components are not recyclable.

I won't speculate about whether the plastic on the board is recyclable, or ecological to recycle. I don't know. This is what I'm asking.

If 1% of indie games are solid, and all AAA game are solid, and there are 100 times more indie games than AAA games, then there would still be the same amount of solid indies as there are solid AAA games. As it is, I think for every good AAA game, there are somewhere between 50 and 500 great indie games.

Finding them is slightly harder, but absolutely worth it.

In any case, complaining about how many games there are out there that are not your thing is a waste of time. Much better to define what you like and look for recommendations from people who like similar games. Who care how many FPSs are released if you don't like FPSs? If you like RPGs, find RPG gamers and ask them what's good. Substitute for any genre; there is no genre out there that's not getting more releases than you could possibly play.

That explains why it happens, but doesn't really help with the problem. The expectation I have as a pretty naive user, is that what is in the .md file should be permanently in the context. It's good to understand why this is not the case, but it's unintuitive and can lead to frustration. It's bad UX, if you ask me.

I'm sure there are workarounds such as resetting the context, but the point is that god UX would mean such tricks are not needed.

Yeah the current best approach to aggressively compact and recreate context by starting fresh. It’s awkward and I wish I didn’t have to.

I'm surprised this hasn't been been automated yet but I'm pretty naive to the space - the problem of "when?"/"how often?" seems like a fun one to chew on

I think Gemini 3 pro (high) in Antigravity does something like that because I can keep asking for different changes in the same chat without needing to create a new session.

It’s not that it’s not in the context, it’s that it was injected so far back that it is deemed not so important when determining the next token.

Any mass that it fires would have a starting velocity equal to that of the probe, and would need to be accelerated an equal velocity in the opposite direction. It would be a smaller mass, so it would require less fuel than decelerating the whole probe; but it's still a hard problem.

Be careful with the word "just". It often makes something hard sound simple.

Not trying to oversimplify. But suppose 95% of the probe's mass was intended to be jettisoned ahead of it on arrival by an explosive charge, and would then serve as a reflector. That might give enough time for the probe to be captured by the star's gravity...?

It seems to me that building a recording device that can survive in space, that it's very light, and that can not break apart after receiving the impact from an explosive charge strong enough to decelerate it from the speeds that would take it to Alpha Centauri is... maybe impossible.

We're talking about 0.2 light years. To reach it in 20 years, that's 1/10th of the speed of light. The forces to decelerate that are pretty high.

I did a quick napkin calculation (assuming the device weighs 1kg), that's close to 3000 kiloNewton, if it has 10 seconds to decelerate. The thrust of an F100 jet engine is around 130 kN.

IANan aerounatics engineer, so I could be totally wrong.

You’re just talking about a very inefficient rocket (bad ISP).

A rocket works the same way (accelerating mass to provide thrust), just far more efficiently and in a more controlled fashion.