She was acquitted of all charges related to defrauding patients. http://www.mercurynews.com/20...

Humans will move to the underground internet, visiting only domains that they exchange hand-to-hand, interacting only with users they meet in person. Registration will be by personal invitation only. If you see a site with open registration, stay away. It is planted by the enemy. Slashdot registration will be reworded: New human registration is now approved by humans. Please come to the park between sunset and sunrise, so we can take a blood sample, to prove that you are human. The problem is, in a few years, humanoid robots will come to the park, with human skin and blood, terminators. What will we do then?

I would think that a weather balloon can be bought without instruments, so you can add the instruments you want.

My question is why they need a barometric altimeter if they already have GPS

.

Thank you for correcting me. Indeed C++ cleans up intermediate values in expressions. It seems that it is even easier to overload operators in C++ than in Rust, because you don't need to overload different variants of the operator for references and values. One overload handles both original and intermediate operands.

The & symbol in Rust is not a "dereferenced pointer." &a + &b is not pointer arithmetic. &a means that you use "a" by read-only reference (without copying it or modifying it). Therefore, it makes perfect sense to use it for arithmetic, even though it looks a bit strange. The operation will use the existing values without copying them or modifying them, and produce a new value. There is a complication, that the result of the computation is a value, not a reference, so to cover all situations you need to define the arithmetic operators for all combinations of reference + value, i.e. 4 overloads for each operation. Luckily, you can create Rust macros to generate the extra 3 overloads from the first one. You don't need to use "&" for primitive types like f64, because such types can be implicitly copied as needed. Rust defines the arithmetic operators for both f64 and &f64. I think this is the right approach for all types. Once the intermediate value is used in another operation (function call), it is "owned" by the new operation, which means that it is automatically deallocated when the operation returns, unless the operator returns it, in which case its ownership returns back to the caller. The result of an arithmetic expression is a single value, with all intermediate values cleaned-up (deallocated).

Whether or not there are pointers involved is irrelevant. With Rust, I think in terms of references, not in terms of pointers, unlike languages like C++, Java and Go which use pointers much more extensively. A pointer in Rust is usually hidden in a standard library type, like Vec or Box.

Rust has built on the experience provided by 20 years of C++, Java, and other languages. Statements like "Rust is still just a toy" and "entirely not proven" dismiss all this experience. Every good language should be a toy that programmers like playing with. You learn it by playing with it. The Rust compiler does a lot more work than other compilers, even giving suggestions about how to fix syntax/usage errors, so it becomes your tutor.

I doubt that C and C++ programmers quote the same things, and I bet most C and linux programmers could easily substitute "Rust" with "C++" in your quotes, except for the last two:

C++ is a toy used in production, producing decades worth of defective code, it will never be trusted.

After 3 months of learning Rust, my impression is that Rust's beta is much better than C++'s maturity. Take operator overloading as an example, for types like polynomials that use heap allocation. Rust does this correctly, so in the expression &A + &B + &C, the result of (&A + &B) will be automatically deallocated after it is added with &C. Can this be done with C++? I tried decades ago and gave up.

I mostly use gnumeric with open document .ods files. It is much lighter than libreoffice. I have also written my own program to read .ods files.

Having the cooling panels perpendicular to the PV panels seems to be a good arrangement, because you want the sun to hit the PV panels perpendicularly, but not the cooling panels.

Social warfare applications like the one you mentioned, where millisecond latency makes a difference between life and death, is not the only supercomputing use case. A lot of scientific computing and AGI itself will not be judged by whether you return an answer in 100 ms, but by whether you return a correct answer, reasonably fast. A lot of computing data is already produced in space from weather satellites, imaging satellites, space telescopes, etc. For starters, space data centers could crunch through that data. Cooling stuff in space is easy. The James-Webb telescope is kept at 50K just by keeping it in the shade (from the sun, the earth, and the moon).

From a photograph that I saw, the ISS has the cooling panels perpendicular to the PV panels, so I don't know what would be the best arrangement. There is also the issue of transferring the heat from the servers. Should the servers be spread out in two dimensions, behind the cooling panels, or would it be better for the servers to be concentrated in one place and use liquid or some other mechanism to to transfer the heat to the cooling panels?

I think conceptually the whole idea is good. I'm surprised the comments here are so negative about it. A quick search shows that the cost to bring something to orbit is about $1000/Kg, and falling, which is already less than the cost of GPUs. Computing is the perfect use case for producing something in space, because information is easy to move between earth and orbit, as is already being done. There is no cost for rent or land acquisition in space. Security is currently much better in space than on earth. Solar power is abundant, and there are established solutions for cooling. A 2km x 2km PV array could be assembled by robots and produce 1GW of power.

Of course there are engineering problems to solve. But saying it's a stupid idea or non-starter is not very clever.

These are easy questions to answer.

For power and cooling see my answer to the parent comment. PV panels and radiating panels would get about 260 W/m2 of power or cooling.

Lack of access to the servers: Data centers use redundancy to handle failed components. Microsoft prototyped datacenters that are submerged into the sea without maintenance for long periods of time.

Latency: No problem. These datacenters can be in 5000 places in LEO, as starlink has demonstrated. A tenth of a second latency is equivalent to 30000 km of light travel.

Solar radiation in space, near earth, is 1300 W/m2, 30% more than on a clear day on earth. Solar panel efficiency is > 20%. Therefore power production is 260 W/m2, when the panels are facing the sun.

According to wikipedia, spacecraft radiators dissipate 100-350 W/m2. This is comparable to the solar panel power generation. The radiated power must be equal to the solar power generation, therefore the heat radiators must be of comparable area to the solar panels.

If an ad is funny, it's entertainment!

If the world achieves balanced trade by equalizing "imports per person" between any two countries, then the most populous country in the world will have a trade deficit, since it will import more than it exports from any other country. And the least populous country will have a trade surplus because it will import less than it exports from any other country. I'm not sure what this would mean or if it is even possible.

Let's assume that there are only two countries in the world, Canada and USA. Equalizing the imports per person at let's say $1000 per person per year, would mean that Canada should import $40 billion from the USA and USA should import $341 billion from Canada, per year.

Let's simplify it some more by replacing money with something tangible, let's say trees (a unit of lumber). If each person imports 1 tree per year from the other country, then Canada would import 40 million trees from USA and USA would import 341 million trees from Canada. Then do the same calculation for something else, let's say cars. Canada would import 40 million cars from USA and USA would import 341 million cars from Canada, one for each person. If I sit at the border line and watch 40 million things from USA exchanged with 341 million things from Canada, I might think, hey wait a minute, Canada is getting screwed here. They are giving 8.5 times more than they are receiving.

I conclude that equalizing imports per person is not a meaningful goal.

You mean it has a feeble voice? Ingenuity looks a lot sturdier and has a lot more mass (4.0 Kg) than than this UAV (they should give it a name). Ingenuity also has solar panels, while this UAV doesn't seem to. But its large wheels may protect it from damage. Also Mars' "strong wind" may be up to 60 MPH, but with 1% density of Earth's wind. I'm not sure what it means about the force/pressure it exerts on things. I'd assume at most 1%, perhaps 1/10000 than the same speed wind on Earth. Here's a relevant NASA page. The web page has survived the recent [climate] science ban. Perhaps climate science is still allowed for other planets.