Now you’re on about low pay, what are you even talking about? Changing companies is the best thing for increasing salary and you’re here acting like a child terrified of losing your job… have you ever even worked at a company on salary? You sound like you’re talking about something you are clueless about. Stop being so afraid, go change jobs.

He looked at me. And I looked at him. And he looked at me. And I looked at him. And he says what did you want again?

They’re probably the same demographic in some ways in that they’re right wing and Trump supporters, they’re just in the upper echelon of the grifters not the grifted.

Hmm, I’m not sure how to correctly word my question.

It was really just aimed at the implication in the comment I replied to that if this were true, we should have seen evidence for it in telescopes already. So my question was, what phenomena would we expect to see because of these topological defects that we don’t already see and have attributed to dark matter.

As far as I’m aware (which really isn’t that far tbh) gravitational lensing is explained without needing any new hypotheses. But if dark matter was implicated in it to heighten the effect, that would still be something we have seen in our telescopes which could be explained by this so it still would answer the comment to which I replied as being something we have observed.

Edit: OK I looked it up and yeah dark matter (or another explanation) is required to account for the amount of lensing we see. But still, that’s a thing we have observed so I guess my question would be, does this new idea not account for the same effect? If it does, that should answer the comment I was replying to.

Isn’t the point of this that it explains the phenomena that is commonly attributed to dark matter? Therefore wouldn’t the things we observe that would point to this be the same things that we observe that point to dark matter? I guess the thing I don’t understand is why we would expect to observe something different because of this than what we attribute to dark matter.

I don’t understand any of this so this question isn’t snarky but something I’m actually wondering. How would we be able to see “topological defects” in space with telescopes?

It doesn’t matter if it looked like a real gun, or even if it WAS a real gun. He had a real gun too, should he also have been shot for having a real gun that looked like a real gun?

YMMV. For me soup sounds like a good idea but I find it annoying to eat so for me personally it is a bad idea.

I’m not sure if that was supposed to be in agreement or countering what I said.

Over the past few decades, some people have noticed and commented on the enormous death toll that our reliance on driving and the vast amount of driving hours spent on our roads and said that that amount of death is unacceptable. Nothing has ever been able to come of it because of that aforementioned reliance on driving that our society has. Human nature cannot be the thing that changes, we can’t expect humans to behave differently all of a sudden nor change their ability to focus and drive safely.

But this moment in time, when the shift from human to machine drivers is happening, the time when we shift from beings incapable of performing better on a global scale, to machines able to avoid the current death tolls due to their ability to be vastly more precise than humans, this is the time to reduce that death toll.

If we allow companies to get away with removing sensors from their cars which results in lower safety just so that said company can increase their bottom line, I consider that unacceptable even if the death toll is slightly lower than human driven cars if it could be greatly lower than human driven cars.

Humans are extremely flawed beings and if your standard for leaving companies alone to make as much money as possible is that they are at least minimally better than extremely flawed, I don’t want to live in the same world as you want to live in.

Really? You don’t think that building solid foundations for people to get on their feet and start making more money themselves, money that they can turn around and spend on more products, would have a fantastic return? The benefit for the economy would be immense but corporations can’t write that into their spreadsheets changing their bottom line so it “doesn’t count”

Yeah. Come back in 10-15 years when half the world is using it or a successive product and people will be posting articles like these laughing at them like they do with the ones saying the internet or cell phones will never catch on and surprisingly no one will open up and admit they were the ones denying it would come. Meta has the money, they don’t care how much they spend, as long as they can get in and corner the market early they will make it back many times over in the years to come… assuming climate change or nukes don’t make it impossible of course.

I use it because I have learning difficulties and it’s nice to be able to ask question after question until I nail down the exact detail that I needed to be able to understand the concept I’m trying to learn. I’ll take all the downvotes in the world for this because the benefit I’ve got from using the service far outweighs anything else.

Their tactics aside, copilot is very useful. It’s helped me a ton on my education journey. Free and easy access to it on the desktop has been game changing for me.

Their third mistake is thinking any corporation will be held accountable

Everyone knows that… that’s what they mean by free, free to use. Why do you think people don’t know this? Did you just figure it out or something? Are you seriously that slow?

They say it’s free but that’s how they get ya. It’ll only cost your soul!

What do you expect? “We’re not hosting an intergalactic kegger down here!”

People who are so uneducated that they think funding public education is a bad investment are great proof of why we need better public education…

Considering it is such a small percentage of the budget and they have developed so much useful technology (https://www.howtogeek.com/831363/these-nasa-innovations-are-all-around-us-everyday/)

I would say, take the money from other things that suck, like handouts to the rich and wasteful military overspending which would easily cover the things we need to cover. Defunding NASA would contribute to the dummification of the country and is a terrible idea.