The account of the youtube video linked in the article has been terminated apparently. Anyone know why or if there's an alternate link?

"Planning" is a strong word..

Just print so much money that people (yes, banks are people!) have nothing better to do than buy stonks. Problem solved!

This is reasoning from a mistake. Market valuation is about VALUE, which is an abstract idea assigned by the market, which is not the same thing as MONEY, which can be "printed"[1]. Market values go up and down on their own, irrespective of the amount of money in circulation. They reflect consensus (often irrational) for what the securities "should be trading at", and that's all. If the currency inflates or deflates, the markets do too.

[1] Though recognize that by engaging in that frame you're painting yourself as an unserious amateur being influenced by partisan media. Real governments do not "print money" in any real sense, and attempts to conflate things like bond debt with it run afoul, yet again, of the money/value mistake.

Damn that's a considerable body of work.

What other middle eastern country is having protests? Haven't heard.

I still don't understand how it's world-changing apart from considerably degrading the internet. It's laughable to compare it to railroads.

Translation is big thing, maybe not the same scale as railroads, but still important. The rest is of dubious economic utility (as in you can do it with LLM easier than without, but if you think a little you could just as well not do it at all without losing anything). On the other hand, disrupting signalling will have pretty long-lasting consequences. People used to assume that a long formal-sounding text is a signal of seriousness, certainly so if it's personally addressed. Now it's just a sign of sloppiness. School essays are probably dead as a genre (good riddance). Hell, maybe even some edgy censorable language will enter mainstream as a definite proof of non-LLMness - and stay.

Did you try asking chatgpt to explain?

When it gets a bit better two robots can make four robots and so on to infinity.

This is because peer review has become a bullshit mill and AI is good at churning through/out bullshit.

A perfect vacuum might have no temperature, but space is not a perfect vacuum, and has a well-defined temperature. More insight would be found in thinking about what temperature precisely means, and the difference between it and heat capacity.

I think your second sentence is what they were referencing. Space has a temperature. But because the matter is so sparse and there’s so little thermal mass to carry heat around as a result, we don’t have an intuitive grasp on what the temperature numbers mean.

To rephrase it slightly. It's not a perfect vacuum, but compared to terrestrial conditions it's much closer to the former than the latter. The physics naturally reflects that fact.

To illustrate the point with a concrete example. You can heat something with the thermal transfer rate of aerogel to an absurdly high temperature and it will still be safe to pick up with your bare hand. Physics says it has a temperature but our intuition says something is wrong with the physics.

I think the better argument to be made here is "space has a temperature, and in the thermosphere the temperature can get up to thousands of degrees. Space near Earth is not cold."

Are you actually making that article, or just "quoting" it as some kind of hypothetical? Regardless, without mentioning heat capacity, I don't see any point to your quotation in this context.

Sorry to hear you can't see it. Let me try to assist you in understanding what you are missing.

Yes I'm making that argument. Because it's true. The temperature of what particles do exist, 500km above the earth, is more likely to be in the thousands of degrees farenheit than below zero farenheit.

The discussion being had, if you read comments above your original, is that it's widely thought that "space is cold" and therefore it's good for cooling.

You're right that heat capacity means that the temperature of space is not relevant to its ability to cool a datacenter. You're wrong that making that argument is a good way to get people to actually change their mind.

Instead, attack the idea at its foundation. Space is not cold, not in the places where the data centers would be. It's much easier to get someone to understand "the temperature at 500km where the auroras are is very hot" than "blah blah heat capacity".

Now you see the point!

Yes, since conveniently the attacker also gets to define who is a civilian.

When one quotes Health Ministry for numbers of casualties and deaths, that is relying on HAMAS for information. To knowingly use sources that have demonstratbly be shown to be false, inaccurate, or misleading makes one also unreliable.

Thankfully, many of us are not in that "We" group you're referring. This is a toxic culture I want no part of. It says a lot about the nature of the Zig community.