After Linus Torvalds gave this talk at Google in 2007, it was clear he would win. (Is there a better quality video somewhere?)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idLyobOhtO4

But I agree: Mercurial was definitely friendlier for people who didn't have time time to go through the technicalities of git. To use git smoothly you pretty much need to learn how it works internally.

Free speech can mean two things:

(1) The general philosophical postulate, that society is better when there is a high level of freedom in the exchange of ideas and critique of other's ideas.

(2) One aspect of the above is that government should not censor speech. Like the 1st amendment in USA.

But if most public discourse takes place on forums owned by companies, and the companies start to practice high levels of censorship, then we might formally satisfy (2) but still won't get the cultural benefits of (1).

That extreme intra-day variation is also partially caused by California's cheap solar power: Cheaper prices draw demand to those hours.

In other locations, (some) people (partially) adjust their consumption patters to follow the cheap wind energy hours, and this leads to different consumption patters. Less intra-day variation but but inter-day variation.

If California's prices were wind-dominated (typically a little more wind at nightime), or nuclear or burning dominated (stable), it would not cause such large variation in the intra-day consumption pattern.

This electricity price figure is readable, but 10 years old, so today the variation in California must be larger than it shows:

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=32172

From this graph we see that in the evening when solar power goes out, for next 3 hours (7 pm to 10 pm) California's battery array is as powerful as 12 nuclear reactors. Then the batteries are drained empty, and the rest of the night California survives by importing electricity from other states. And partially by running hydro power only during the nights, keeping it at zero during the day.

https://www.gridstatus.io/live/caiso?date=2026-05-15

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Result_type

    cross_sign(A, B, C)

What about you not putting your name on the paper? Or does it hurt the student if they publish in their own name only?

Suspend for 6 months from a conference that is held yearly?

And if they in their review work have agreed to a "no LLM use" policy, but got exposed using LLMs anyway, then their submitted research article is desk rejected. Theoretically, someone could have submitted a stellar research article, but because they didn't follow agreed policy when reviewing other people's work, then also their research contribution is not welcome.

(At first I understood that innocent author's articles would have been rejected just because they happened to go to a bad reviewer. But this is not the case.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Estonia#Oil-shale

Isn't this rather giving yourself another shot.

This paper implies that for health, permanent standard time would be best, and permanent DST would be the worst. And even keeping the current clock-shifting would be better than permanent DST.

"The combination of DST and winter would therefore make the differences between body clocks and the social clock even worse and would negatively affect our health even more."

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07487304198541...

But it makes them anti-science.

https://blogi.thl.fi/kellojen-siirtaminen-pysyvasti-talviaik...

Yes, science is very clear: Permanent standard time is best for health.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07487304198541...

https://srbr.org/advocacy/daylight-saving-time-presskit/

https://esrs.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/To_the_EU_Commiss...

https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-cal...

https://jcsm.aasm.org/doi/10.5664/jcsm.10898

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jsr.14352

https://www.chronobiocanada.com/official-statements

But I think the scientists have made a mistake in their communication: They focused too much arguing against the clock-shifts, and didn't put enough effort to communicate why also permanent DST is a bad choice.

Quantum physics tricky for two separate reasons.

(i) The mathematical theory (Schrödinger equation, wave function, operators, probabilities) is solid and well-defined, but may feel unintuitive, as you say.

(ii) But quantum mechanics is also an incomplete theory. Even if you learn to be at peace with the unintuitive aspects of the mathematical theory, the measurement problem remains an unsolved problem.

"The Schrödinger equation describes quantum systems but does not describe their measurement."

"Quantum theory offers no dynamical description of the "collapse" of the wave function"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function_collapse#The_mea...

A school would usually teach the "shut up (about philosophy) and calculate" approach. These philosophical problems about the meaning of quantum mechanics have been with us for 100 years, and mainstream physics sees them as too hard or even intractable, and thus as waste of time.

20-30 years ago eco-terrorists bombed and burned down a number of biological research laboratories and other targets, because of the perceived risks of gene technology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Liberation_Front#Notable...

Given all the current talk (and the famous scifi movies) about the risks of AI, I am a bit puzzled how there are no similar activists groups trying to sabotage AI facilities.

What is it that made the risk from gene manipulation feel so much more real and leading to actions, than the current AI risk? The Terminator movie franchise is more famous than any scifi movies about gene technology. (Edit: I guess Jurassic Park franchise surpasses The Terminator.)

For some crops we have. But it would be nice to have more diversity, so that the cheapest food options wouldn't be just wheat and corn because they happen to be the crops that are most amenable to mechanized agriculture.