At the very least, I can't see mods wanting to have a front-end that hides things in ways that they can't turn off.
Otherwise, people on the blocklist would become effectively immune to moderators using the front-end, because they'd be completely hidden.
Anthropic's still considered a startup? I'd have thought that they would be too big for that.
I remain quite annoyed by how the major driver for resolving both the Borg and Dominion conflicts hinged on a very illegal, extremely immoral thing that someone did.
DS9 had the Morphogenic virus that Section 31 unleashed, and Voyager had the neurolytic pathogen.
It being the thing that won the wars in the Federation's favour ends up implying that it would not have succeeded without either of them, and that all their talk of morality was simply pretence.
It defeats the entire point of the Federation existing, as part of them having those moral stances in the first place was that they could succeed without having to stoop to underhanded means like their peers did. It might be a harder road, but ultimately more rewarding.
Going by those two conflicts, if you're in a war with the Federation, and they don't see you as an organic humanoid, they will happily have someone attempt/commit genocide on your populace to win, allow it to happen by inaction, or reward them for it. There's no real difference between the Romulan Star Empire or the Federation, except that the Federation pretends to be moral.
Many DS9 fans seem to think that the show's shades of grey renders the Roddenberry vision on display in TOS and TNG invalid - dismissing it with "it's easy to be a saint in paradise".
It might be easy to be a saint in paradise, but the Federation is proof that it's possible to begin with. It won't be easy, but that hardly means it's impossible.
It's also one of the things about the DS9 mirror universe episode that ticks me off. "Mirror, Mirror" ended on a nice, optimistic, hopeful note, where for the Terran Empire's flaws and atrocities, being ethical was ultimately a more successful strategy, and that with time and much work, they too, could be like the Federation. DS9 throws all that out the window with "Spock's reforms softened the empire, causing its destruction", and the hopeful ending, that anyone, even the worst civilisation seen thus far, could become like the Federation, was ruined.
As it turns out, you can only be the Federation, if you're human, in this universe, with this perfect set of circumstances. Anyone else would be making a fatal mistake.
Its particularly irritating in both those cases, because there's groundwork in both DS9 and Voyager to end the war through other means. DS9's ending of the war could be done through helping/freeing the Jem'hadar, talking with the Vorta, and convincing the Founders solids aren't actually all that bad. Same for the Borg, where Voyager very clearly states many a time that what the Borg seek is perfection, and they believe assimilation to be a manner of achieving it. It would not be a great stretch for Voyager to repeatedly interact with the Borg, and eventually convince them that cooperation is a superior method, gradually pushing toward the end of the war in so doing.
Instead, what we got took the easy route, where the Dominion were forced to the negotiation table in the face of extinction, and Borg civilisation/the Collective was outright destroyed.
Its just a terribly cynical viewing of the Federation, where they can only succeed by being underhanded, or having people "do the dirty work" for them. If that's the case, why does the Federation even exist to begin with? It may as well be an empire like any other.
It wasn't a good Star Trek story, but it was a good spectacle. The whole thing was basically nostalgia with little else, between the brain worms, Spock, Romulans, Kirk being made Captain with the crew, etc.
The only thing it was really missing was the Borg and Dominion.
But I'd argue that spectacle was what Star Trek needed at the time, to make a casual audience want to watch more of the actual Star Trek, and bring it back to the cultural fore.
At that point in the 2000s, Star Trek basically had the reputation that it was a boring TV show for nerds, where you'd be watching people sit around and talk politics for an hour, over panning shots of planets and the Enterprise.
Star Trek of all things to have such boneheaded threads of anti-science magical thinking, noxious xenophobia and childish cruelty is unforgivable.
I don't know if that's necessarily true, since even the TV shows have had the Federation express those viewpoints before, with little to object against them.
If Data or the EMH MK. I were human, their treatment at the hands of Starfleet would be plainly unconscionable. Admiral Satie shows that anti-Romulan sentiment is still alive and well within the Federation, enough that she could tap it for her crusade without much pushback. Former Borg drones, like Picard, or current ones, like Hugh, are also treated with considerable hostility, even if they aren't being actively hostile.
The bigger issue that is that neither show nor film really tap into those problems within the Federation in any significant way. Data, the EMH, and the crewman Satie accused got by because they had friends amongst the crew of the Enterprise/Voyager who stood up for them, and supported them. But the wider problems in Starfleet aren't touched upon. As "Author, Author" touches on, they're treated as one-off incidents, rather than highlighting underlying problems in the Federation that need addressing.
I cannot see the Federation, after a devastating strike during the Klingon war, capturing a Klingon, then promptly ordering the creation and release of a bioweapon that deliberately targets Klingon genetics; to be released to spread amongst the population to wipe them out.
And yet after Wolf 359, that was exactly what was ordered to be done with Hugh. We know that it likely wouldn't have worked, given that they accidentally infected Hugh with individuality, and the Collective eventually cut his cube off after the episode, but the intent was for Geordi to create a memetic virus that would target the visual processing of Borg drones and kill them all that way.
For better and worse, Discovery took a lot of cues from the Abrams films, being more action focused, with flashier effects and cinematography, for example.
It got toned down as time went on, but there were parts here and there in Discovery where you can tell they were trying to replicate the films.
I don't think it's inherently bad for Abrams himself to not have seen the show until asked to do it, but there's absolutely a good question of why the people that commissioned Abrams chose him, when he had no familiarity with Star Trek beforehand.
Particularly the opening scene in the first film, the cinematography (sans overused lens flares) and sound design was excellent and showed both the awesome spectacle of the sheer size of the ships and the awful danger of space combat.
For their flaws, the Abrams films delivered in visual spectacle.
The intro in the second film, where the Enterprise rises out of the oceans, to the awe of all below, is pretty much one of a very small handful of times where the Enterprise is shown to be quite impressive. It's a really good show of how a religion could form around it if someone is just a little careless with the prime directive. For its weaknesses, it's still a cutting-edge Federation starship, with advanced technology beyond our ken.
The first film had the fast-paced nature of Star Trek combat, but it fell into the trap of doing things like Star Wars, by having only warp engines be fast, and keeping a small distance between the ships. Impulse engines can trivially reach a decent fraction of the speed of light (full impulse can go to the moon and back in minutes). They should be no less agile at typical engagement distances.
I'm half-expecting for it to turn out that he was being wholly compliant, and he's being accused of destruction of evidence because they were looking for something that never existed to begin with.
The garden might be walled, but apparently nobody's bothered to check for weeds.
You also have the benefit that, since it's a single memory pool, it can be used for other things, and allocated dynamically.
Where in a conventional machine, VRAM is exclusively for the GPU to use, and RAM is generally for the system. The capacities are usually fixed (I think it's possible to offload GPU memory into system memory for some uses, but that's about it, and your performance usually falls off).
Downside is that because it's a shared memory pool, everything uses it, so you lose some of the actual capacity for things like your OS.
Programming seems like a uniquely awful use case for this.
Saying "function open bracket close bracket open brace carriage return tab print open bracket quote hello quote close bracket semicolon carriage return space space space space print open bracket quote world quote close bracket semicolon carriage return close brace carriage return" seems much more cumbersome than just pressing the buttons and typing it manually.
Interesting. I had no idea genetic damage was linked to Alzheimer's disease. Thought it was chance/inherent genetics, a bit like cancer is.
That's not true, though. There's nothing to corrupt. The human genome is 41% fruit fly, 60% banana and 8% virus simultaneously. Hugh Mann Georg, whose genome is 131 billion percent human is an outlier adn should not have been counted.
Plus natural selection isn't solely random by nature, nor is it independent of humans. It doesn't magically go away, even with sci-fi gene technology, since people would naturally select genes that they find attractive, make them superhuman, or won't give them some nasty disease. Humans deciding that they want a gene that gives them breasts all-year round because they find them attractive is no different to humans selecting for the trait over generations, for much the same reason.
At least in this case, yes. They'd just not get them, since they'd want something they can already easily process, and the source for the quote is a bookseller, who isn't likely to sell something like that to begin with.
An old book that might disintegrate and damage the scanner and hold things up would be undesirable, compared to either a new one, or a reprint of an old one.
It's worth pointing out that this is standard practice when digitising books in most places, if they're not irreplaceable. Mass-produced books would fall under that category.
Turning the page and photographing what's there is really only done for some books, which you can't afford to destroy.
The reason Firefox still exists is that Google can prove it's not a Chrome monopoly. Now this is just me forming conspiracy theories, but I do believe that Google would stop these payments the day Firefox would really out-innovate Chrome and get more market share.
I don't know about that. One of the big reasons chrome even got off the ground when it started was that it had the reach and backing of Google. If you opened Google, you had a "Get Chrome". If you did a search on Google, you had a "Get Chrome". You had advertisements, etc. It being faster to start with was nice, but even then, the other browsers at the time caught up pretty quickly.
Without that help, Firefox might just get left in the dust. We've already been at the point where websites are mainly designed for Chromium browsers, and that you're encouraged to fire it up if something doesn't work for you, and you're using Firefox, Safari, Konqueror, etc, since the majority of users use some form of Chrome.
Microsoft couldn't hack it when they tried developing their own browser, and they're both much larger than Mozilla, have the reach of Windows, and whatever was left over from IE. They ended up switching over to Blink/Chromium.
I can't imagine Mozilla would fare any better, after losing a decent chunk of their funding. The fact that they've done decently so far is a minor miracle in and of itself.
For example, I've already had a decent bit of resistance just trying to encourage friends, and family to use an ad-blocker.
That's basically a recommended standard for using the internet these days, like pop-up blockers were. Government agencies use and generally recommend them.
Part of the report is also a contingency for when they need to find alternative income.
They're hardly abandoning all Firefox development and dumping it into this.
Unfortunately due to the inverse square law, they don't have a very long range.
Possibly for the better. Last thing you need is people accidentally hitting a plane with one of them.
People already do it with lasers. Something that destroys the electronics would be even worse.
Basically, every time you visit the page, it has code that sends 500 * 4 queries to one particular instance, making it load a page from the modlog, do a search, etc.
So everyone visiting the page would suddenly be sending 2000 queries each, and in theory, enough users would DoS the server by overloading it with those requests, rendering it unusable.