bawng

bawng t1_j2bd9q3 wrote

This seems absolutely insane. I don't know what the energy requirements to produce H(0) are, but unless they're astronomical, this basically means table top fusion reactors.

Since there isn't more buzz about this, I have to assume there's a catch or a big systematic error, but I look forward to discussions on the topic.

Edit: I looked up the author. He's a cold fusion crackpot and the existence of H(0) hasn't been replicated by anyone. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/36064/is-ultradense-deuterium-real/75183#75183

27

bawng t1_iz09zme wrote

It was great in the beginning but back then they had actual humans who transcribed what they heard to train the model.

When they stopped having human operators and started trusting the model everything went to shit.

5

bawng t1_iz075ln wrote

The other day I asked it to start a timer and instead it played a song on Spotify that was called something similar to "Timer" and when I asked it to stop, it turned off my TV.

9

bawng t1_iwqlrwo wrote

But unless you count the first EVs a hundred years ago, hydrogen cars have been around for a lot longer than modern EVs. We had a hydrogen car push in the 90s or something and there was a lot of public and private investment into building a hydrogen distribution infrastructure. But the cost never fell. When the first modern EVs started coming around, they were already cheaper.

2

bawng t1_iu4w96m wrote

> The earliest known industrial robot, conforming to the ISO definition was completed by "Bill" Griffith P. Taylor in 1937 and published in Meccano Magazine, March 1938. The crane-like device was built almost entirely using Meccano parts, and powered by a single electric motor.

Yeah I probably read a bit too quickly. 1937 was just the first robot that met the ISO definition, but it was not a real industrial robot.

1