> +20% speed for +20% spend isn't going to motivate a trillion dollars a year in spending.
Except that if your company go 20% faster than the others companies, you win market shares. But then, everyone will use the same tools and companies will be at even speed, but the tool will stay.
Now...if the market is saturated, it's useless to try to do things faster. Cheaper yes, but not faster.
I've skimmed the article but did not found the answer to the title. My childhood was marked by random internet shutdown from my parents during online game, computer shutdown...I can tell I experienced the frustration it can generate to a child. And it actually had me more hooked, as the scarcity and the "shutdown risk" and the accumulated frustration led me to try to play whenever it was possible.
Now I have a kid, and a tablet, and the best way to let them go is to watch things together, propose other things rather than a "stop it now it's enough", avoid doom scrolling pattern, short content...One must avoid creating uncontrollable frustration, that's what make kids crazy.
And even better if tablet can be avoided most of the time, they tend to forget it.
Okay, I agree. I think we can also agree that author is not a physicist and he just didn't think further. To me, the comparison can be understood. If he reads the comment he should correct the error.
2. It's a good analogy. Waterfall are falling because of gravitational potential energy, just like an electron would fall when put in an electric field.
At constant height, a dam on the moon have less potential energy than an actual dam.
Hey, at least you'll be able to add that exterminated tigre specie in your postcard from your last adventure trip. And more water to that river, with some greener trees etc.
To me, the article just ask "Is it possible to simulate living organism features?" and say a small yes by saying "Simulations like these show how computation can produce lifelike behavior across scales".
I'm not expert to judge the result of "drawing a missing hand by using neural network on each pixels"(if it's what it's done? Again not an expert).
The title should definitely be "Is it possible to simulate living organism?" given the last sentence is "Simulations like these show how computation can produce lifelike behavior across scales".
Nothing about life is discussed here, it's not even defined once.
you do side projects! More seriously, I'm exactly in this situation and you'll have to find transversal skills, often soft skills when it' very different. And side projects, or courses.
And accept a junior position, even if you're a senior dentist.
Did a similar thing. I did a cubesat internship at some university (different from where I was), which played a role in getting a master and then an other internship at a lab working on a part of a scientific satellite to study Jupiter's moons (launched in 2023!).
And so on. It's crazy how pushing a series of little things can put you on the right path, especially early on life.