The existing large-scale batteries are largely lithium. There are a bunch of iron-chemistry ones and sodium-ion ones which have been deployed over the past year, with factories going up to scale them up. I’m not expecting to be limited by lithium availability for stationary batteries.

They’re talking about 5+ years on the new nuclear in these. And they haven’t done it before, so a 30% deadline slip is realistic.

You can put up a lot of wind and solar in that time.

Mostly:

• New nuclear is really expensive
• It also takes a long time to deliver
• The new reactor examples in here consist of reactors from suppliers who haven’t done that before

So it has the feel of a plan to promise to spend a lot of money several years from now, and get a lot of PR points today, and quietly cancel the project later.

Yes — also non-native speakers of a language tend to follow similar word choice patterns as LLMs, which creates a whole set of false positives on detection.

“filter out” is an arms race, and watermarking has very real limitations when it comes to textual content.

It doesn’t take people on the internet saying it though; just an association with people saying something and the name, which happens to people who write news articles about something.

The bots are not reliable summarizes like that. They often can’t tell the difference between the author and the subject of a piece of writing.

I was surprised by that too.

All of them. I can post other sites just fine; it’s only washingtonpost.com and wapo.st links that are blocked.

Or from your ISP. The Washington Post ran an article about that today, but links to them get blocked by some sort of filter on lemmy.world

I don’t think that’s tractable.

The scams are designed as alzheimers screening tools. Teaching will help some people, but not that many.

Depends on how close they can be made in watt-hours per kilo. They might be good enough for vehicles once the technology comes into reasonably widespread use, while avoiding a lot of the issues with trying to acquire sufficient lithium.

Sounds like it.

At some point, that car won’t be cost-effective to repair, and you’ll want to replace it. Be a lot better to have strong privacy legislation in place when that happens.

More that peoples’ movement data isn’t worth much, so it wouldn’t be a big deal to impose legal requirements on keeping it private.

As Sen. Wyden says:

This is timely in light of JD Vance’s comments about wanting to surveil the body of every woman in America. I just dropped a new investigation into car companies selling off your private location data to shady data brokers. The case for federal privacy legislation has never been stronger.

per the article, it’s rather better than that.

Pretty much anything trying to predict human behavior is a heuristic; people using them as if they’ve got some kind of certainty is a problem.

My impression from the article is more that they’re not doing any kind of garbage-in assessment: nobody is making sure they’re getting answers about the right person (eg: some women date more than one guy) and some women don’t feel safe giving accurate answers to the police, and there aren’t good failsafes available for when it’s wrong; you’re forced to hire legal counsel and pursue a change via the courts.

Not in the same detailed minute-by-minute tracking of where you’ve been.