Don‘t start just any phd project. The profit per effort rate is bad.
“We argue that this will soon be technically feasible using advanced AI for formal verification and mechanistic interpretability.”
That is so delusional! Even OpenBSD, a comparatively simple system with focus on security, has 1 remote hole per decade.
Then use the proper word instead of redefining an existing one with strong negative connotation!
Let‘s help the bitcoiner who replied first:
»Been in Bitcoin since 2014, still have absolutely no clue whatsoever how to even sign up to Nostr....help section: "coming soon".«
You have no clue what it means to be old. Or a man.
Women „might“ rape you. There are attachable dildos. You are empowered now.
imagine old men and blue pills
I‘m not sure that if I understand. Is it that the infrastructure is unmaintainable at the future income and needs to be simpler and focused on the basic functionality?
There is strong scientific evidence that red meat isn‘t bad for your heart - unless you eat it.
If you do … a lot of evidence points to heart disease:
Right! Use a condom to keep the urinal clean!
I have seen people freeze when they see a spider. My profound studies of Tom & Jerry cartoons tell me that some people can kick a cat, but jump on a chair when they see a mouse.
OK devs, stop coding and start to produce new users
Here's how #NostrNovember started a year ago. This year though, let's make it a more of a marketing project like nostr:npub164q45vfa8prpl7f63stsl9qm9n22v6julkasjdqxjc8kevchsj0sp42rl3 suggested. Instead of only using Nostr, let's promote Nostr on all other social media platforms. Let's showcase the best features of Nostr clients and best features of the protocol. It's going to take all of us to make this November successful. We'll need memes, videos, infographics, songs, and plenty of long form content. Let's do this. 🔥🔥🔥
We‘re competing against No Nut November.
This should be an easy win.
yes, I can see it. Hope that helps.
Mind Boggling!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEWHhrHiiTY
TL,DW:
* Pfizer vaccines did not contain DNA during the trials
* the final vaccine did contain DNA
* billions of snippets of DNA per vial
* quantities were almost within the legal limits for such "contamination" - some samples above, some samples below
* legal limits were established for un-coated DNA, not for stuff that was coated with lipid nano particles to get into cells - a standard that according to the professor was later found to be overly cautious for un-coated DNA that would get eliminated in the body anyway but a completely different thing for coated DNA
* DNA looks like chopped up standard tool to mass produce custom RNA - a contaminant Pfizer apparently tried to eliminate by chopping it up
* Chopped up means more pieces with each piece getting a chance of getting integrated in a vital spot of the cell's DNA, which could break the DNA and in the worst case cause cancer (he did talk abut DNA storing information for thousands of years but not specifically mentioned eggs or sperms being affected as his concern)
good summary!
The sequencing (that he also talks about and wants to habe funded) of random cells from random people to look for tiny pieces of DNA that could come from the vaccines sounds like a waste of resources without chance of success. Most cells have not come into contact with the vaccine. Many S-protein producing cells should have be killed by the immune system while they produced it. If he find an affected cell it must contain a characteristic piece of DNA that could not have been there naturally.
His answer to the publication question was weird. He easily could publish his vaccine vial sequencing results. He might have got the question wrong but that still leaves the question. Why did he not try to publish?
true, but they repress that truth by nitpicking: „we don‘t have a god“
? You don’t need to be online to play hitman. I just got messages that the scores at the end of the games will be skipped.
