They said with suspicious confidence…

Robotics (or more broadly mechatronics) is a super interesting field. To do the work at the mechanical/electrical interface is really hard.

The field of industrial controls skips the hard part and just buys stuff that is pre-designed to move. Then those pre-designed pieces are made to fit and work together. It’s like complicated Legos and is honestly very fun and rewarding.

If you want to do programming with a physical result, controls engineering is a great option. I would recommend shooting for the hard stuff (real programming - DSP, FPGA, etc) knowing you’ve got a safe fallback with industrial controls (PLC programming).

Has this shown to be effective at stopping bots? It seems like you’d just be a few bad actors to ruin the system

I don’t think so. The main reason Facebook is so bad is it’s engagement algorithm. It is designed to maximize user engagement to sell adds, and it does that by putting outrage inspiring posts in front of users so that they have an emotional response and stay engaged. Using a human voting system instead of an outrage algorithm to determine what content people is exactly why I enjoy this platform over the other social media platforms.

Is there still rage bait here? Of course! Is it systematically shoved down your throat? No.

I was assuming you’d make an account with the ID for the govt instance and use anonymous accounts for all other browsing. At least that’s what I would do.

I’m not familiar with web of trust. What does that mean?

I believe there is existing precedent from SCOTUS that official government Twitter accounts were not allowed to block citizens accounts due to it being a ‘public square’. So that was a govt official taking the action of silencing someone’s ability to respond to them on social media protected by 1A. If the PLATFORM had blocked that user it would have been perfectly valid, since the GOVT did not silence a citizen’s speech.

I believe having the govt run the instance would make the entire forum subject to 1A in a way current social media is not. Would love a constitutional scholar to chime in, but that’s my argument.

I also don’t get the impression there is a large bot presence here today. I do think if the platform was used as a normal communication network between constituient and representative it would probably become a target for foreign and domestic bots.

This is why lectures should be obsolete at this point. Lectures should be a video done really well once. Class should be practice time where you can ask experts for help when you get stuck.

Haha yes, I did mean causal.

I think it’s a casual argument. People are saying pitbulls are not inherently more violent, they just tend to be the dog of choice for people who want violent (guard) dogs. They are then taught violent behaviors by their owners.

I understand the current context, but I hate seeing people cheering for gerrymandering.

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.

Some states have anti-gerrimandering written into their constitutions, so that would not be easy.

Oh yeah, location sharing will have almost no effect those risks. Totally agree.

Just disagreeing that low probability of occurrence automatically means the risk assessment should be low.

Risk assessment is probability and severity. The probability can be vanishingly low, but if the severity is astoundingly high then acting like a high risk situation could be appropriate.

Take asteroids. The last planet killer to hit us was 94million years ago. A rudimentary estimate could put the probably as 1:94mil. The severity of an asteroid impact of that magnitude is off the charts, so it is reasonable to consider it a risk and act accordingly to spend resources to search for and track asteroid trajectories.

The severity of abduction, murder, and rape is probably pretty high for most people, so considering it a risk even with a very small probability is not unreasonable.

I’m not really sure what you’re asking or getting at. Could you be more explicit?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium_recycling

Aluminium recycling is the process in which secondary commercial aluminium is created from scrap or other forms of end-of-life or otherwise unusable aluminium.[1] It involves re-melting the metal, which is cheaper and more energy-efficient than the production of virgin aluminium by electrolysis of alumina (Al2O3) refined from raw bauxite by use of the Bayer and Hall–Héroult processes.

Recycling scrap aluminium requires only 5% of the energy used to make new aluminium from the raw ore.[2]

Cans and glass are infinitely recyclable. Recycling aluminum saves 96% of the energy of producing new.

Paper is semi recyclable, but it degrades, so it can only go through the process a certain number of times.

Plastic is marginally recyclable. Only about 10% of plastic that goes into a recycling bin gets recycled. It was a hoax by petro-chem to make plastic seem more sustainable than it is.

I’d argue the checks and balances worked, the electorate failed. Trump tried to overturn and election and the checks and balances held. That should have been political suicide. He should have not even won a school board seat after that, but the electorate failed and reinstated him. You cannot build enough checks and balances into representative government to save the electorate from repeated mistakes. The checks are there to ensure someone must show their true intents to the electorate before they make a choice.