A bit technical, but some of the most vocal critics of Orch-OR claimed there was no way that quantum states could orchestrate across synapses or between neurons. This quite interesting finding argues otherwise.
I wonder if this validates the Orchestrated Objective Reduction theory of consciousness pioneered by Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff. Seems like it would.
Buddy, it is state censorship if they are calling for regulatory oversight of Youtube, Facebook, Gab etc. Which is exactly what papers like the NYTimes and Guardian (and others) are promoting in the last few days.
BTW it ain't flat earthers and lizard people believers that frighten them, bruh, it's people who question fabricated Syrian gassing, (and the bbc fraud regarding the same), babies in incubators (and the MIC that fabricated that lie), Iraqi WMD (NYTimes Judith Miller - leading to millions of dead), and the global warming religion. THOSE are the REAL targets of this media campaign.
This article is just part of a coordinated media cavalcade, accelerating in the last few days, to attempt to justify, and promote censorship by the state - to shut down dissenting opinions. See it for what it is, a crude propaganda effort, by those in power, who feel threatened by alternative media.
Correct. The NYTimes wants to control the narrative, decide what’s important, and in some cases, outright lie to the public, and get away with it because there are no counter narratives allowed. Hence this article, proposing government regulation of the media. They think people are too stupid to see what they are doing.
The powers that be are afraid that social media has caused them to lose control of the narrative. So they hire people like this author to argue there is danger in permitting broad, inclusive, open discussion, where all voices are allowed - a bedrock of our western tradition. This propaganda is designed to weaken popular resistance to censorship laws, and condition people to condone the mass deplatforming we are seeing recently.
Apparently not confident in their ability to make better arguments (to counter the false narratives etc..) she and they propose more government regulation. Great for those who have means to influence policy makers. Bad for the rest of us.
To do this you would need buy in from all the legacy carriers first. It doesn't work without having them all as your partners, so you get the economy of scale you need. That will be very difficult. Next, you need to consider your own operating costs. How are these vehicles going to be powered? Routed? You will still need to sort and distribute the packages. What if one breaks down in route? How are you going to lift them back up onto the surface? Are you planning to retrofit buildings with tubes going down into your network? Or distribute in/out terminals throughout the city? Both which would require an insane amount of upfront politicking and planning. There will be issues of easements, zoning, and liability to work out. Then, even if you get all the players to agree to your plan, which is unlikely, you still need to deliver the package at a (significantly) lower cost structure than they currently are able to do with government subsidized roads.