FaceDeer

When your standard is “perfection” then nothing at all will ever meet it.

Your standard of acceptability is “perfect”, then?

Again, a properly built landfill doesn’t have that problem. I specified that right from the start. They’re designed to manage leachate.

Seems to be from some short stories and poems that have been published over the years.

Different rainbow bridge with a different afterlife on the other end. I hope the signage is clear. I can only imagine a couple of very confused Vikings are wandering around, perhaps disappointed there’s no big battles to participate in but on the plus side having tons of dogs that are happy to see them there. And conversely, a couple of good bois running around Odin’s hall having fun with all the commotion and feasting and whatnot going on there.

If the plastic is not degrading then it’s not releasing anything, be it methane or CO2.

Isn’t one of the big talking points against plastic the “it’ll be around for thousands of years” thing?

Yeah. It’s not like rich people will have trouble accessing their favourite flavors of pornography regardless of the laws.

“Never intended” doesn’t mean it doesn’t work as one.

The point I’m making here is that if we already have a chunk of plastic, why not bury it? Your own comment that I originally responded to was about how the composting process for these bioplastics is difficult to do and so people rarely do it. Landfills are comparatively quite easy and common, we already have that process well established. So if you’ve got a chunk of carbon-rich plastic right there in your hand and you’re trying to decide what to do with it, which makes more sense, turning it into CO2 to vent into the atmosphere, or sequestering it effectively forever? There are carbon sequestration projects that go to much greater lengths to bury carbon underground than this.

CO2 is CO2, it doesn’t matter where the carbon came from. If you’re sequestering plastics that were made from plants then you’re taking it out of the atmosphere for a net benefit.

It absolutely baffles me how states are able to botch executions like they’re doing. I’ve had many dogs over my lifetime and sadly that means I’ve seen many of them off to the rainbow bridge at the ends of theirs, and there’s never been a botched euthanasia. I guess vets are just more professional and compassionate than these executioners.

I oppose the death penalty universally. But I’ve long argued that if you absolutely must execute someone and must avoid the messiness of exploding their brain for instant painlessness and reliability, then nitrogen gas asphyxiation is probably the best way to go - completely painless and incredibly hard to botch. Just flood the room with nitrogen gas, how hard is that? It’s a common industrial accident. And yet there was a case recently where a state tried nitrogen gas asphyxiation and the monsters somehow managed to botch even that.

Yeah, one-hole boats seem like it’d take away what little “strategy” there is in this game. It’s pure randomness whether you hit one, and as soon as you hit it it’s over.

I actually see it as weirdly counterproductive. When bioplastics degrade they release their carbon into the air as carbon dioxide. Whereas a properly landfilled piece of plastic takes its carbon permanently out of circulation, it’s literally sequestered.

Landfills get a bad rap. When they’re done right they’re a clean and reliable way to deal with waste. They’re just easy to get wrong if you don’t care, and they look so unphotogenic it’s easy to campaign against them. But one of my favourite parks is a former landfill done right, aside from the occasional monitoring well scattered around the place there’s no way to tell what it used to be.

Yeah, people who can vote but don’t are implicitly voting for “whatever everyone else thinks.”

Modern LLMs are trained on highly curated and processed data, often synthetic data based off of original posts and not the posts themselves. And the trainers are well aware that there are people trying to “poison” the data in various ways. At this point it’s mainly an annoyance to other humans when people try.

Again, they are not universally enforceable. There are plenty of jurisdictions where they are not.

Which company us “the AI company?”

One wonders if a similar meeting was once held regarding the Warsaw Ghetto.

The enforceability of EULAs varies with jurisdiction and with the actual contents of the EULA. It’s by no means a universally accepted thing.

It’s funny how suddenly large chunks of the Internet are cheering on EULAs and copyright enforcement by giant megacorporations because they’ve become convinced that AI is Satan.

If it’s paywalled how did they access it?

The problem with those things is that the viewer doesn’t need that license in order to analyze them. They can just refuse the license. Licenses don’t automatically apply, you have to accept them. And since they’re contracts they need to offer consideration, not just place restrictions.

An AI model is not a derivative work, it doesn’t include any identifiable pieces of the training data.

So charge them an appropriate price for the scarce resource they’re using.