This one makes me sad. Kristi Noem is corrupt.
Because we don't care, we aren't uniparty stooges who see everything through the lens of race or sex.
Except it doesn't work well and won't for the forseeable future.
AI is a misnomer. It is linear algebraic brute forcing of data to provide a seemingly cogent response. It is not intelligent. If you heavily constrain the context (either via data set or manually linking pertinent data), it can provide fast synthesis of data, but that's about the extent of it's usefulness.
For instance, last week I asked a recent LLM about a hypothetical place of birth. "If at the time of my birth, my mother was in Indiana and my father was in France, where was I born?" It responded that it couldn't know where I was born by what information I had provided. Upon inquiry, it said that a human's birth place had to be where the mother was physically located because of how we are born, and that a father's location had no bearing on this. I had to manually link these facts and then re-pose the hypothetical for it to answer correctly.
The human mind functions as a fact map - closely related facts are bound together and different contexts can exist together so that only the context that matters can be used when needed. This is a three-dimensional biochemical and bioelectrical process that is beyond our ability to replicate on traditional silicon.
People like to "yea, but" about quantum computers, and I have to tell them that quantum computers are 100 years away from general implementation because it's such a fundamental shift that everyone who programs will have to be completely re-trained to use properly. It's not like you'd be able to install Windows:Quantum in 5 years when we first get a system running.
Even moving from "yes, no" to "yes, no, maybe" or binary to trinary is such a fundamental shift in how we think about programming that it'll be a two generation leap to general use. And that's before we discover how to implement a qubit's total possible number of states (I think I heard up to 32 states can be achieved currently).
AI, like guns, drugs, Protestantism, and so forth before it will not bring us the darkness. Only our sullied spirits will.
It's oppression if you tell them the truth
I appreciate my GAW mod overlords.
Except cats5 who I believe is a flock of alien cats in a trench coat here to take us over and enslave us for alien cat overlords hiding just on the other side of Jupiter.
China owns 51% of it. But all the dummies are rallying around it to save it for some reason.
They are running jamming devices. They will cause problems with newer models year vehicles being able to phone home to the OEMs.
Hi, Mr Burns!
It's gotten them this far. Why stop now?
Really? Gosh, I wish we had established in the 1930s a huge federal government privatized military force that could have found out about this before now and brought the perpetrators to justice before we were compromised.
I guess hindsight is 20/20, rite quiz?
You are confusing "structural weight percentage" with "total weight percentage". 80 percent of the main structure of 777s (and roughly the same amount of a 767) is aluminum. That equates to roughly 20% of the overall weight.
And skyscrapers are designed to fail as safely as possible, just like aircraft. All of your engines failed, but you can still glide, etc. if your secondary structure is compromised, the primary structure can continue to hold.
Positive pressure and negative pressure environments are well established in buildings. Ever opened a door and felt a rush of air in either direction? That's a pressurized environment. Airflow into the building is negative pressure, airflow out of the building is a positive pressure. This is part of the structural design (and keeping people breathing).
As for your wood burning fireplace, toss a fire blanket on it and see how well it burns. There is a difference between "fuel source" and largely flame-resistant structural materials as tour "debris".
I said exactly that about the flame resistance on the steel. The problem is that the materials in question should have slowed heating for much longer. Remember, these buildings were designed to withstand passenger airliner impacts.
You seem to be of the impression that temperature equalizes immediately and that a fire will only burn at it's hottest, despite things that slow transfer and cool being in play.
Take a 1" steel bar and put a torch to it. How long until it deformed? Now, wrap it in fire resistant material, how long did it take that time?
Now, why the steel bar video I showed you take less time than the raw steel bar?
Don't we all?
Odd that you keep referring to the maximum temperature a perfectly mixed and fueled flame could reach if it was perfectly thermally isolated from it's environment and fuels. You are telling us the /theoretical/ maximum temperatures things can reach in perfect lab conditions and then not applying the real world....at all.
So, what temperatures will jet fuel reach when it has to burn in a positive--pressure environment with debris sizes from aerosolized to large segments of fire-treated panelling (e.g. floor, wall, ceiling)?
Of your melted aluminum, how much would turn to vapor and burn, knowing that only about 20% of the weight of a 777 is aluminum (~120,000 pounds of a 777's ~600,000 pounds-depending on model)? 5-8%? How long would that vapor combustion last and how much heat stress would it add to the environment after 15 seconds? How did the the aluminum reach the vapor combustion temperature (in oxygen) of ~2,500 C?
Amidst all this, how much heat is transferred to steel beams with heat resistant coatings? Would a heat resistance coating failure of 1m3 of secondary structure be enough to cause immediate cascading failure? 2m3? 9m3? What were those heat resistances rated for in minutes and how did the fire sustain that exaggerated temperature for that amount of time?
How much of the primary structure needed to be compromised before failsafe building failure ensued according to the engineering specs of the building? Why didn't it perform to 50% of design?
Your Gish Gallop of factoids don't make you knowledgeable, it makes it seem like your experience in engines and materials was limited to CAD, where the maximum possible number is the only thing taken into account for design purposes.
Every health chain is different. Most have a "records" department. Call and ask for the procedure to purge your records.
This is why electronic records were demanded in the Obamacare package. To practice medicine, you basically need a nurse and a secretary plus a thousands of dollars per month database all so that when you submit a claim, the insurance industry has your complete medical record.
I tell people to expunge their records at least yearly from wherever they have gone.
Polio, too. Modern cleanliness matches the trends of transmission and contagion reduction better than introduction of vaccines.
The only vaccine that was historically effective was cow pox as a salve for small pox. A great medical leap that could have been exploited properly but really wasn't.
Of course. There's another 18 months at $10,000 per month to suck out of your family.
No offense to your friend - just what I went through with a relative.
The target of modern chemotherapy is to use compounds that are just a little bit more deadly to cancer tissues than to surrounding healthy tissue.
So....probably.
I offer my condolences for your loss and I see why you remain convinced.
But, despite my own misfortunes including a miscarriage, I have read dozens and dozens of studies about EMF including weapons of war and medicine. If you really want me to, i can tell you how to modify an iPhone to actually kill someone.
CAN you make it dangerous? Yes. Just like you can make a car, a house lamp, or a knife dangerous. But in general, cell phones and 3-300ghz signals as used in civil infrastructure is not dangerous. I await the information that changes my outlook.
Dr Fauci says mrna vaxes are safe and ivermectin is a danger. Based on studies he totally saw this one time, like, for real.
I know you're not being dishonest as per my tongue in cheek humor, but you haven't offered anything but a video and "trust me, dawg". The studies i provided are counter to what you've presented as read in the past. Seriously, go be well.
I hope you take the time to read the information I provided when you find the time. Just accepting every claim without discernment will destroy MAGA. Be well.
Without context, those numbers mean nothing and they are such small emissions that they are meaningless.
Minimum needed from cell phones is 0.000002 nanowatts? Minimum needed for what? Im pretty sure that's single electron levels of energy, there.
Then, id have to ask: what kind of heart exposure was measured? Direct tissue (petridish) or insitu? If insitu, what was the methodology? Were these models? Surveys? Data dredges?
The surveys I gave you showed directed emissions millions of times more powerful than your numbers and showed little effect at extreme and near constant exposure.
I will review that video and scrub for citations. There seems to be no citation list for it anywhere - not on his website nor as a collection at the end of the video. Upon searching for the citation list so I could prepare in advance of watching the video, I notice several red flags on his website: Almost no activity in four years, seeming paytriot scheme on his website, and number stretching in a two year old article that is his second most recent post (which is also telling you to buy his stuff) - "20,000,000 uw". That's 20 milliwatts. Milliwatts are an everyday measurement used in energy measurement for both wired and wireless transmissions - there's no reason to multiple it by a million to give you nanowatts unless you are trying to create a scary sounding number.
I'll leave you with two citations in return for my homework assignment (i picked up two from this thread! This actually makes me happy!). https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/sites/default/files/ntp/htdocs/lt_rpts/tr595_508.pdf and https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/sites/default/files/ntp/htdocs/lt_rpts/tr596_508.pdf
These were long term studies on 2G and 3G signals. (Remember that when they studies started, 3G was The Devil! like 4G and now 5G became) What they showed is that if you expose rats and mice to a cell phones maximum transmission power for 10 minutes on, 10 minutes off 9 hours a day for your entire life (including in-utero), you have an uptick in cancers. This is at a power level of 1.5 watts per kilogram in rats and 2.5 watts per kilogram in mice. And, in order for the uptick to be statistically relevant to the control population, you need to do the same cycle of use at 4x the power a cell phone can legally transmit at.
Basically, these studies say that if you are 200 pounds, you will need a cell phone strapped to your head that's transmitting at least 135 watts. 4.5 hours per day. For your entire life. All for a small increase in cancer risk. On the plus side, you won't miss leg days now that you'd have to carry a car battery at about 20 pounds to run this contraption for 4.5 hours every day.
Studies like these are what goes into the fear mongering about the wireless spectrum and they attempt to invoke the precautionary principle - which is dangerous bullshit designed to put all the power into the hands of our elite overlords. The problem is that instead of any nuance about relative risks, transmission strength versus distance, or that sort of thing, the message is always "cell phones cause cancer! It's proved!"
No, we cut that off with the panama canal. ;)