What is the connection between dark matter & Dune? Is dark matter spicy? If I inhale too much dark matter do I gain psychic powers? Or is it like sand; coarse, irritating and gets everywhere?

Here's the thing. With the possibility being so close, you could argue the date is now being more heavily influenced by the pessimists. If the prediction date is 2027 that only gives the optimists 5 years to play with, but the pessimists can go as far out the other side as they want.

In a sense it doesn't matter because it will happen when it happens and the prediction date is like reading tea leaves - a thing you look at to distract yourself whilst you come up with a forecast.

It is worth remembering that technology moves at the rate of the fastest. Everyone else has to catch up to the new point and restart from there. What I'm trying to say is that predicted dates reflect what each individual knows but actual dates will reflect only what the fastest groups achieve. If Bob predicts 2035 based on his knowledge, but doesn't know that Sue has already achieved (but not published) several of the steps on his timeline, Bob's prediction is worthless. We obviously don't know ahead of time who falls into which category, all we can say for sure is that the pessimists are more likely to be caught out.

I can't tell if they have done something really clever or really banal....I think they are saying that the energy is locked into a transfer between two entangled objects, but they I'm not sure they have distinguished between 'matched' and 'locked'. Hopefully someone smarter comes along and rescues us.

Probably true, but you may occasionally want to talk to other actual humans?

Maybe not, but sites like reddit have always been partially about being part of a larger community.

It's a bad example. The purchase of diamonds has always been a form of status symbol, making the decisions about it very different to those involved in purchasing common goods. Luxury goods centred around human labour will become more normal in the AI era as that is how people will come to express status - they can afford to have a real human do something.

That doesn't stop the tech being a massive disruptor.

This is a bad example but also a good illustrator - the decisions behind the price of diamonds is an indicator of how at least part of the economy will play out.

Partly money, partly safety. Mostly safety. A bad medical trial can go very bad.

But it would alleviate a lot of suffering. Cancer is often the final cause of death for the elderly, so the life expectancy numbers may not change much, but it is still a hard way to die.

I'll take the extra 3 years too, thanks!

The piloting is only one aspect. A flying car is a small helicopter, and downdraft is a thing. You can't get around the need for thrust of some kind, so you can only have a flying car if you have a place to land it, or your neighbours don't have a problem with seeing everything get blown over every time you take off or land.

There is also the problem of fuel costs, but that is another thing. The main issue is that if you want to keep something weighing 1000kg in the air you need a lot of thrust, and if that is pointed at the ground it causes havoc.

Initially AI will create a lot of jobs exploiting its new capabilities, but as it improves it will also be capable of taking on those roles. The entire point of an AGI is that it is as capable as a human (and then eventually more competent).

Things worth bearing in mind:

1. Once a machine exceeds human performance in a task, humans never regain the lead.

2. Technology is progressing, not staying still, so machines get better over time whereas humans as a species aren't improving at the same rate

3. Humans don't operate on magic, so eventually everything we do will be replicable.

At some point the work available will be purely about the quality of human to human interaction, which will retain value just as hand-made still has a place in the market for manufactured goods.

How many punnets is that? Could we express it in slugs? Pounds is fine for food but cutting edge science should be metric imho.

I think SPARC has a shot; they are designing for sustained fusion and with the work already done at JET and other tokamaks they will be starting with great data on how to manage plasma.

What are your thoughts on SPARC? I understand the magnets they are using are potentially much better for confinement than the ones ITER is planning on using, and with the advances in maintaining a plasma made by JET I think SPARC have a good chance of making a serious dent in the timelines.

They are an inevitable part of self-moderated social media. It's a function of the system. With unlimited content to devour, how many are willing to work through arguments that make them uncomfortable or angry? All to easy to click off that and go back to the comfort of something which affirms your existing worldview.

No, I don't have a solution for that and yes I suspect it is a very bad thing the consequences of which we are just starting to work through. Chatbots will definitely enhance the effect as will any form of proto or full AGI (computer, create me a documentary explaining why I'm right about everything!).

Perhaps another step on the road to fusion, all the experiments are helping to get there. The more data that is gathered about fusion and near-fusion conditions, the faster all the teams involved can move forward.

Well it's not me downvoting you, I disagree with your perspective but in a friendly way.

I understand the arguments in favour of simulation hypothesis but I don't find them convincing compared to the alternative explanation. Let me put it this way.

1. There has to be a base reality somewhere, even if simulations are made they must at least start in some form of naturally occurring reality (unless we are in some sort of spontaneously generated looped simulation, a super version of the Matrioshka brain, in which case you could argue it is both a base reality and a simulation).

2. We don't know how much computing power would be required to simulate another reality at the fidelity needed to convince it's inhabitants that they are in a base reality or indeed what what types of reality we might simulate

So given the choice between something which has to be true, somewhere, or something which might only be true I choose the option which is least speculative.

The arguments from the perspective of 'if 99% of sentience is simulated, you are probably a simulation' aren't convincing either, because you only get to that point if a bunch of your other assumptions prove to be correct. Or to put it another way, if I accept that there are endless mad gods dreaming of civilisations then I have to believe I am the dream of a mad god - except I don't have any proof that even one mad god exists.

Well, here's hoping some of what you predict will occur and we can talk about this again in a few hundred years.

We'll have to agree to disagree, simply because there are so many unknowns. Your hunch is that it's a simulation, mine is that this is a base reality, neither of us can prove it. C'est la vie.

None of those things are proof. We don't understand the fundamental nature of our reality and currently a computer simulation is a good analogy for some of it. But it's about as valid as claiming angels exist because the sun looks like a halo (though of course there is a reason for that....).

Simulation theory is just the current popular version of 'we are all the dream of a mad god' and that's it.

So Meta now have an AI capable of human level social manipulation. Wonderful! If anyone needs me, I'll be wandering the woods laughing maniacally and trying to make myself king of the squirrels.

Edit: Just to be clear, I do understand this is the game 'Diplomacy', but it still involves some level of social interaction and planning. So my point stands, thankyou, have a nut.

Was this headline generated by an AI? Because I almost had a stroke reading it.

I must admit, I am on tenterhooks to find out what GPT-4 can do. There have been rumours but rumours don't pay the bills.

Wrong forum. This is, and I'm being kind here, philosophy.

Just to be clear, believe what you will and go in peace, but don't confuse a dream with science, they are (kind of) opposites.

cost per KwH is really the king for grid scale storage.

Outstanding. Now let's see the round trip $/KwH comparison over it's lifetime.

(I'm not dismissing this tech but the cost/KwH is really really important).

They could fill the time by tessellating tabbies I suppose.

If it happens quickly it will be an absolute debacle, wild west capitalism. The fastest in could make the current mega-corps look like small family businesses. It does worry me, real short term chaos could ensue and there is hardly anyone in power (right or left) that has offered a solution.

But does the CEO want to make a fool of themself? Yes it's all hype for now, fortunately we don't have long to wait.