⟍ı⋂ᑕο−ހ⅂∪ᒧ+х⊃Γ·L−⟍ހᒧހ·ހ−ހı⅂⟍⅂⟍ހ⊃ހ−⋂⟍⅂οހı⅂ᑕ⅂οހ−⅂ᑕ⋂⟍ހ⅂ހLހLހο⋂⟍ހLހ·⋂⟍⅂⟍ހᒧ⅂+⅂+ހı
I think there’s hope as long as we don’t nuke ourselves back into the stone age. If we keep a steady pace of progress and take good care of our only habitable space ship, we should be able to figure out how to thrive pretty much anywhere in space. Self inflicted extinction events are the biggest threats at the moment.
Oh… so after billions of years, the Earth will be tidally locked with the Sun. If we start harvesting Earth’s rotational energy one way or another, we’re just speeding up the process. Anyway, that sounds about as bad as burning fossil fuels.
Islands, shores and land in general tends to resist the tides. Not just a little bit either. By that logic, the rotation of the earth was never sustainable to begin with.
What about the propeller type generators that spin both ways? How would they slow down earth’s rotation?
On top of that, the economics only make it harder. Those who take dirty shortcuts, will have lower CAPEX and maybe even OPEX. This gives them a competitive advantage compared to those companies that choose to follow a more sustainable path.
Same goes for various industries and energy production in general. Burning stuff is usually the easiest way to do it, but it comes with some serious long term consequences. Ideally, we would use renewables to produce electricity, and then use that electricity to heat things up when needed.
Unfortunately, large parts of various industries has been built around the idea of burning things instead of using electricity. In order to fully transition, we would need to completely rebuild many factories and radically modify countless others.
Seriously though, the density of rhetoric devices, such as contrastive reframing and hyperbole, was pretty high for a science article. Vanilla copilot leans towards an even more dramatic tone, but this wasn’t far behind.
And then there’s also emotional maturity. If you don’t process your unpleasant emotions, you’ll end up reacting in unhealthy and unbalanced ways.
Tardis would have been more familiar to me. Didn’t even remember that the Harry Potter movies had a bag of holding references.
What could possibly go right.
All of them have at least one. Usually it’s 2-4 emojis per post, but some have way more. Seems like a deliberate marketing tactic.
The classic “I didn’t have the time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead” excuse doesn’t really apply any more. Ramble as much as you feel like and let the LLM worry about refining it into coherent communication. Minor tweaks are also welcome, if the original post is short enough.
Can confirm. I usually swipe so aggressively that weird mistakes sneak in. Plus, I tend to ramble, so having an LLM clean up the mess I leave behind is genuinely helpful. Even this message was proofread by one to fix all the silly errors I tend to make. Before posting, I still double-checked to make sure the core message matched what I intended. Sometimes they tweak things too much or throw in something unexpected.
You can tell it was rewritten, can’t you? All that fancy language just doesn’t feel quite natural.
Don’t the food labels go into any more detail than that?
I’m beginning to think this must be one of those EU things. I couldn’t find a single yogurt like that in my local supermarket.
I took a look at the two most famous colas and two fake colas, and the only sweeteners I was able to find were aspartame, acesulfame K, and sucralose. No sign of erythritol. I wonder if I’ve ever even seen a beverage with that stuff in it. However, I have seen bags of it sold in supermarkets, so apparently it isn’t restricted in that sense.
The authors caution that their study was a laboratory study, conducted on cells, and larger studies in people are needed.
Ok, nice to know, moving on.
Smaller is better in the bag and bigger one is better on the desk. Sounds like you might not appreciate the benefits of small size.
And Starwars
Would make sense to relocate it next year. Nobody wants to be randomly arrested by KGB.