There are tons of options for that, mainly energy storage such as batteries, hydro, and green hydrogen. Nuclear is not needed and too expensive among other things.
It’s because the education system is utterly outdated across the world. No digital literacy, media literacy, or health literacy in the curriculum but lots of things you’ll never need and forget to never be useful again within a few months. Studies should investigate things relating to this subject.
It’s also because of the quality of search engine results but both are directly linked, people need to learn how to use search engines etc.
Seems like quite some progress in nanobiotech there.
See wetware computer for more info about this. Some studies in “2023 in science” will get integrated there soon, there have been similar recent studies.
It’s more or less only (that is mainly) useful for building components that you then use in your man-made tracks. It’s a tool, just like AI image generators are tools albeit there the replacement use-case is substantial. AI-generated voice also needs to be considered in this context I think.
Yes (200k–300.000), that’s why it says pre-humans…we didn’t arise out of nowhere, it was a continuous evolution and it seems like if those had died out we wouldn’t be here. (However, that’s not settled, there are substantial reasonable doubts over these results as hinted at with “While alternative explanations are possible” and elaborated in the other comments here.)
Good question, it wasn’t a warming and even if it was, I don’t think it can easily be translated to today’s climate change. They refer to the Early-to-Middle Pleistocene Transition (not much info at that page though). If it’s linked, that doesn’t mean it caused it – I think people in that regard far too often think of (especially singular) causes instead of contributors within a complex interconnected set of causal factors. Maybe you’re interested in this non-included paper from the same month which projects an upcoming large sudden population decline – it’s just not substantiated and one can’t just compare modern humans with other animal populations.
See the papers linked here
Thank you, will look into this. I had my doubts when I first heard about this but even with these sources I still think the study is significant beyond the large attention (and that itself is also a factor). I don’t think there’s much doubt that “The precision of the findings, though, may be a stretch” is true which doesn’t invalidate the study and like a critic said “The conclusions, she says, “though intriguing, should probably be taken with some caution and explored further.”
Also consider that I usually have 8 main tiles and two brief ones, the only other alternative main tiles this month were the dogxim, Y chromosome and astrocytes ones which could get summarized nicely very briefly at the bottom while this one should be included but was hard to summarize that briefly.
I don’t think they were narrowing this down to one species of ancient pre-humans rather than all species thereof. The number is surely wrong, the question of the scale of magnitude is roughly accurate. Would be nice if you send it/them my way if you find them, thanks for your elaborations.
Here is the study (it both reduced workload and increased effectiveness), I don’t think you understood what this was about but that’s nothing to criticize with the brevity of text
That’s why I put “While alternative explanations are possible” there.
I didn’t add it to the WP article, and nothing here suggests this to be “conclusive”…it’s just really ‘significant’ which even skeptics of this seem to agree with. Would be interesting if you have a source for “large number of assumptions” though: that doesn’t seem to be a good description what people doubting it pointed out / criticized here: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/31/science/human-survival-bottleneck.html I previously had something like “Some peers doubt the study but if correct, […]” there maybe that would be clearer?
Because people are not so interested in reinventing the wheel a thousand times when there could be just 3 optimal open source solutions.
Also many products are plain useless or even harmful to society such as mundane noneducational distracting addictive mobile games.
If you can glance over 100 posts in 10 seconds that is of little importance. The issue is that nobody enabled good ways to do so. Also people should rather devote their times to priority purposes such as editing Wikipedia or developing open source software that is not some niche repo but e.g. MediaWiki or Lutris.
Ich finde das einen super Vorschlag und finde Kialo klasse – würde es gut finden wenn man strukturierte Debatten bzw Argumentenkarten von dort hier einbetten könnte.
Ich glaube allerdings nicht dass das so einfach geht. Sollte aber mal jemand testen – Kialo hat so ein Embedding. Deinem letzten Absatz bzgl “eher relaxed etwas bequatschen” stimme ich zu – man könnte es aber einfach nur ermöglichen, heißt ja nicht dass alle Debatten damit ersetzt werden. Man könnte eben Argumentationsposts erstellen oder bestimmte Argumentenzweige einbetten.
Argüman ist die beste FOSS Alternative aber womöglich wird Kialo bald open source, ich habe sie mal gefragt und warte noch auf weitere Details.
Here are some correlations of language skills and other intelligence factors or evaluations (e.g. IQ) via a study (recently integrated the info into the article: Neurogenetics – language GWAS
However, I largely agree – see for example this argument / its sources
Instead of arguing against, here’s an arguments map (for and) against: Does pineapple belong on pizza?, Kialo
Could you license this image under CCBY so that it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons? I’d add it to here. Let me know if that’s okay or if CCBY is mentioned somewhere.
No, they just added lots of data for one of the multiple things that current emulation efforts (just like neural networks / brain-inspired AI software) so far didn’t even include (neuropeptides).
There’s no reason for why it would now be possible to simulate complex nervous system processes, but maybe this could enable getting closer to that. I don’t know what you mean with “outside behavior” though. Maybe you’re referring to the behavior in some simulation like this?