Lmaydev
No I don't think so. Nuclear is super effective and consistent, especially for large setups.
Using renewables while we get our nuclear up makes complete sense. And subsidising nuclear with renewables after that also makes sense.
But the technology to rely entirely on renewables isn't really there either.
We're reaching the point where discussing cost in regard to the energy crisis makes us look like fucking idiots.
Imagine what kids reading the history books are going to think of these discussions.
And 10 years isn't that long really. If someone said we could use no fossil fuels in energy generation in 10 years time that doesn't sound long at all.
We did this for a friend's birthday at uni. There were about 20 of us. Great night haha
I used to love texting these numbers when drunk.
It wasn't programmed for any questions. It was trained hehe
That's not what LLMs are for. That's like hammering a screw and being irritated it didn't twist in nicely.
The turing test is designed to see if an AI can pass for human in a conversation.
"catapult like" they fucking wish
For the majority of commercial users they literally don't give a fuck either. It's on techies that really care about his stuff sadly.
Both. But it's not a nice clean list in the new testament.
There's 100s of commandments in the new testament.
I literally don't believe you based on the knowledge you've displayed here I'm afraid.
Christians pick and choose what parts of the old testament to teach.
When my kids had bibles forced on them the old testament wasn't included at all.
The way it's been explained to me in the past is that a lot of the old testament is very strict rules for surviving in the desert 2000+ years ago.
You'll find only the really hateful sects of Christianity lean heavily on it.
It really seems like you have no idea about the topic at hand. So I don't get why you argued in the first place tbh.