Even so, it still seems to be a small effect. The author mentions some studies looking at sunlight vs all cause mortality. These, and more recent studies [1] found much higher reductions in all cause mortality from sunlight exposure, of about 30%. It's thought that other factors may be behind this, such as NO production in the skin in response to UV [2].
Most of the time it's the decisions that kill, rather than pure mistakes. It's possible to mitigate that risk. Good decisions (such as using checklists) can also mitigate some of the mistakes.
Of course when you're dealing with a light twin with geared turbocharged engines, there are additional risks from mechanical failures (such as engine fires), as well as mistakes that can happen when addressing an engine failure (shutting down the wrong engine, getting too slow and doing a Vmc roll, etc).
To be honest I would never fly in any light twin other than a Seminole (which I did my multi rating in).
Well they're about 4ft diameter and not really even possible to move. My electric chainsaw would just burn up trying to cut them, and the cost of a hydraulic woodsplitter wouldn't be cost-effective.
Current plan is just to leave them there until either they start drying/rotting enough to split, or I find someone who wants to take them off my hands.
It's a combination of technique and the type of wood. Even with perfect technique, some wood is simply too hard to split. I've got the bottom 5 or 6 rounds of a bigleaf maple sitting in my yard that I simply can't make a dent in. You're welcome to take it if you can split it :)
It depends how you use it. You can either get it to explain a concept, or do your homework for you. Its a bit like the decision students have to make as to whether to review their material before exams or go out partying.
Overall it just seems like a huge waste of money to piss away the huge tuition cost your parents probably paid.
No, they have a patent so they would be in a hurry to publish if the results were good.
From the comments in the article above, it sounds like it may have failed it's primary outcome (autism symptoms). They only say there was significant benefit for "average of all symptoms", but it isn't clear if that is the same thing.
I would say the main downside is not knowing what all your code does, and where to find any particular function.
After the initial coding is complete, will you need to use AI to fix bugs? Presumably that is both slower and more expensive than doing it by hand when you know exactly where to look?