Graphene flakes are all that is needed for concrete reinforcement, and it's trivial to produce, even at scale. Carbon chunks are thrown into industrial blenders with water and detergent, resulting in graphene flakes sheared and then separated in suspension. The flakes are separated, washed, and dried.
Large graphene sheets are hard. Tiny flakes are trivial, gradeschool kitchen science.
This is where you might use a variation of that "healing cracks" bacteria in conjunction with the "eats plastic" bacteria. If you could get the plastic digesting bacteria to excrete rigid oxides, then most of the plastic would be replaced with an interlocking 3d mesh of concrete and rock-like bacteria waste.
This is one of note thousands of videos of cats and dogs using buttons to talk.
Cats, and all mammals, have a neocortex. Theirs is not as deeply layered or large as humans, but they most definitely have the ability to reason abstractly, are aware of themselves, think emotionally, and engage in complex, time aware planning over long periods.
Your views are wrong. Language areas like Broca's region in the human brain are a consequence of physical distribution relative to the connectome and sensory endpoints. If you were to rewire the millions of connections to the lips, tongue, mouth, ears, and other body parts to be locations on the neocortex, broca's region would be somewhere different. You have about 1 square meter of neocortex responsible for all of your perception and cognition, and almost all of it is uniform. Neurons aren't differentiated by function, and animal experiments show that plasticity allows for arbitrary rewiring.
The literature in the field shows that human cognition is likely superior to other species in the depth of cortical layering and size of the organ. It's likely the only reason elephants and whales or other animals with larger brains can't compete with humans is the mere absence of hands and vocal organs. Our range of colors and audible senses are important but lesser than many animals.
Give an orca hands and human speech and there's nothing we know about neuroscience to imply that the animal wouldn't be smarter and more capable than humans. There's a lot of evidence that the killer whale would be more intelligent than humans in many ways.
The cortical layering and columnar architecture of neuron clusters differs between species, and seems to dictate the cognitive depth of abstract reasoning. There may be different algorithmic constructions in neural connections that favor human level cognition.
In principle, however, human brains aren't terribly different from many other large mammals, and elephants certainly display complex, emotional, symbolic, and abstract reasoning well within a range comparable to human experience.
Your notion of animal cognition is unscientific and biased toward an assumption of human superiority that isn't grounded in fact. Neuroscience is slowly and tirelessly matching toward reverse engineering the brain. The more we learn, the more we find similarity in the basic functions of mammal brains, from mice to humans to blue whales.
Was. They've sold out to the ad churn, laying off journalists, and some genius middle management is steering the company toward profits over quality journalism.
They're a dead outlet, unless they restructure their management to preserve journalistic integrity. That's expensive and they seem more interested in cashing out their reputation.
Advertising incentivizes lying. The best presentation wins, in this current ad market.
Metrics that track good faith interactions are needed, like eBay reputation - if someone isn't 98% or higher, they're going to be overlooked or bypassed in favor of someone with a higher score.
Product reviews and ratings get gamed, because current systems don't reward good faith transactions - Amazon and Google customers purchase attention and shuffle facts around top maximize purchases. If quality reviews and curation were incentivized, there would be a thriving class of reviewers and experts playing a role in the marketplace. Their absence is glaring, and the horde of product influencers and professional reviewers underscore the deep corruption of adtech. Those people leech money from the market by selling the ability to lie. The lies are sanctioned by adtech firms, and often laundered through otherwise reliable data sources.
Any legitimate attempt to compete threatens the entire adtech ecosystem, so a majority of all consumer marketplaces are incentivized to cultivate the corruption and prevent any changes or reform that threaten the sanctified lies.
Things like Angie's List and product review vlogs and expert podcasts are stuck within the system, regardless of their intent or functionality when they start. They eventually converge into niches that support the system as a whole. Even reddit, requiring individual human dialog and interaction, has been infested by professional reviewers shilling crappy products.
You can't trust the data sources because trustworthy sources are incompatible with adtech. Google has sufficient data to fix it, but they'd lose money by allowing reform, so they maintain the ethically gray areas ferociously. Their business is not quality search, it's maximizing advertising profits, and it's more profitable to have 50 people paying a premium for scraps than 5 high quality vendors with vetted products earning those spots through quality and service.
They shouldn't be doing stupid things like hosting anything important on Facebook.
I have zero sympathy for Australia's inability to elect competent government.
They signed up for free services like every other chump on the planet, with the same terms of service, with the same naive, zero-fucks-given attitude toward privacy, service continuity, or responsibility, and it bit them in the ass while highlighting their stupidity. This story is going to get repeated over and over until western governments catch up to social media.
Steelmanning is your own good faith attempt to understand the opposing argument so well that you can articulate it as coherently as your own position.
If you're simply repeating what the other person said, you're not using the concept to full effect.
If you're framing your own argument as a strawman instead of clarifying the opposing argument, you've missed the plot entirely (unless your opponent is arguing for the use of strawmen in debate?)
The utility of steelmanning is to minimize assumptions. Everyone has to demonstrate their comprehension. You can take it further and in order to 'pass' the steelman stage, you have to agree with your opponent's steelman argument, or have a dialog to refine it until you're satisfied that both of you understand your argument.
A cluster of many $8000+ gpus. You're looking at around 350GB of vram, so 30 12gb gpus - a 3090 will cost around $1800, so $54k on the gpus, probably another $15k in power, cooling, and infrastructure, $5k in network, and probably another $20k in other costs to bootstrap it.
Or wait 10 years, if gpu capacity scales with Moore's law, consumer hardware should be able to run a ~400GB model locally.
Web scraping is legal. Reddit users, like all other members of public forums, put their comments on the internet for the whole world to see. And collect, parse, process and manipulate. If you don't want the whole world to have access to your writing, you'd have to join a private forum.
Trying to shoehorn social media posts into some contorted post-hoc bastardization of the concept of privacy is ridiculous.
Shockingly, things that people post to publicly accessible websites are accessible by the public. We're starting to see social damage from this, with facial recognition and authoritarian governments using people's posts for tracking and oppression.
Decentralized services with strong legislation protecting personal data, and globally recognized content licensing will all be needed to prevent future abuse, but everyone currently in the planet over the age of 20 is more or less personally responsible for the massive and naive oversharing. We know better now, but 15+ years ago nobody except Sci-fi authors and fringe activists had a grasp of how badly unprotected globally shared streams of consciousness could go wrong.
Every argument for death strikes me as silly. If anything, functional immortality would incentivize people to be better. Your want relationships to be stable and mutually respectful at a minimum. Marriages would be somewhat hard to maintain - if you were in good health, mid 20s body, and expected to live centuries in that state, lifelong commitments achieve that "quantity is sometimes a quality all its own" effect.
We'll need a different scale of maturity, too - an 18 year old adult in a relationship with a 300 year old adult makes the term "adult" ridiculously ineffective in describing anything meaningful.
Age and death and maturity tie in to almost every aspect of life and culture and human experience. We don't have the cultural tools and concepts that allow for immortality to fit. If it's achieved, the world radically changes and we won't know what those changes will be until it happens. It'd be like tasking Edison with predicting how the internet would change life, or cell phones, or asking Julius Caesar to write about how the germ theory of disease might improve the human condition. We're smart enough to predict small parts of it, but there's a whole world of ideas and behaviors that get unleashed by immortality, and a non-trivial percentage of them are probably counterproductive with regards to humanity at large (immortal Putin, anyone?)
He's got an excellent diet. He's also got very solid reasoning behind metformin supplementation, having done years of research and investigation. He's a smart and respectable guy, operating in good faith with his research, so if you find yourself disagreeing with him over something trivial, it's unlikely you're right and he's wrong.
Implying that metformin is useful only to mitigate hypothetical harms from nutrition (a trivial dispute) is probably wrong.
Across various interviews, he's recommended metformin for exactly the mitochondrial effects you're talking about. He doesn't supplement on workout days to prevent disruption of the healing and recovery. Metformin isn't something that anyone should start taking blindly or blithely, as it can amplify damage from other circumstances, but it's got a clear place in Sinclair's regimen for very good reasons.
Metformin's longevity effects work on a lot of species. It's got solid science recommending it for life extension, like the other things Sinclair uses, but unless you're a doctor, or work with one to create a comprehensive life extension, health, nutrition, and fitness plan, metformin probably isn't a great idea. Sinclair is doing something similar to juggling chainsaws - it's really cool that he can do that, but it's dangerous for amateurs. Too many unknowable factors can blow up in your face.
Then again, maybe it'll be part of a standard regimen in the next decade, and the immortals are living among us.
Man, i think they'd want stuff like:
How to create a budget.
What does a 401k do for you.
How to plan for retirement.
How to do your taxes.
Balancing a checkbook.
Psychology of debt versus paying in cash.
How to save money.
Nutrition planning under constraints - feeding yourself or your family cost effectively without eating garbage food or wasting money.
Don't get me wrong, intermediate economics topics are useful and valuable, but I think people are overestimating the level of basic knowledge young people have by a huge margin. It might be good to culminate in a crash course in investment banking and hedge fund management, but let's make sure we have a rock solid foundation of practical personal economics that empowers people to take advantage of any level of income, even chintzy $9/hr teenage summer jobs.
Also, workers rights and financial security of identity - cover basic workers rights, unionization rules, benefits, drawbacks, when you need a lawyer, where to report employer misconduct, small claims court, identity security and credit bureaus, credit freezes, and so on.
These are entirely artistic/ceremonial objects. Someone found a dried out pufferfish and then realized they could make a badass looking hat out of it, they did, and the meme stuck. insert quasi-religious cultural narrative here after it's passed down a few generations.
If we're doing something stupid, the correct course of action is to stop doing the stupid thing, not to refine the stupidity. Software patents are stupid.
Graphene flakes are all that is needed for concrete reinforcement, and it's trivial to produce, even at scale. Carbon chunks are thrown into industrial blenders with water and detergent, resulting in graphene flakes sheared and then separated in suspension. The flakes are separated, washed, and dried.
Large graphene sheets are hard. Tiny flakes are trivial, gradeschool kitchen science.