Yeah, the basic principle does sound solid. It looks like they’re not even relying on it to neatly work like random filters, but are applying statistical analysis to whatever superposition of speckle patterns comes out of the device.

The level of precision they’re talking about sounds more impressive than I would guess for it, though (1nm over 1um), and I don’t see the connection claimed with optical trapping or ultrafast imaging at all. If it checks out, I expect we’ll hear more in not too long.

Wow. Big if true!

These popsci sources will republish anything, though, and East Asia has a bit of an academic integrity problem, so I think I’ll wait for someone to replicate it.

If someone can replicate this research, it would basically amount to a way to measure the composition of anything. That seems like it could be handy to me.

Almost all people would agree that’s not the same thing as the subjective experience of pain, though. By that measure a smoke detector is actually screaming when it’s power is interrupted.

Plants don’t have organs for movement or information processing, because those are too energy intensive and wouldn’t help much. Their other tissues respond to stimuli, but the data rate is orders of magnitude slower than an animal in the same environment.

I’m not sure why these signals would need to reach any significant complexity, but if they did it would be a truly alien mind that expands with the plant’s growth about as fast as it thinks. And it’s kind of beside the point. Stealing from !Teppichbrand@feddit.org:

Plants have feelings too
No, they do not. There is no serious study to suggest that they do. Plants do not have a brain or central nervous system. At most, they respond to stimuli. If you really care that much about the welfare of plants, you should go vegan, since many more plants “die” for animal feeding. Do you feel bad while mowing your lawn? And would you rather rescue a potted plant than a dog from a burning house? Is docking pig tails the same as branch trimming to you? Question upon question…

Prove it. They do not have any sound-producing organs, nor any structured nervous system to coordinate a non-hormonal response to anything.

People also believe that goldfish have no memory, and insects don’t think or even aren’t alive. You’ll notice the common thread of these exonerating us for our tiny bowls and our swatting.

It’s like the modern version of “animals don’t have a soul”.

Depends massively on the farm and the practices.

Being a cow on a pasture looks okay most of the time. Factory farms should not exist.

TL;DR, they physiology is pretty similar to someone filling your lungs with a saline solution, but slower because they’re cold blooded.

When you consider this, that most plastic comes from fishing, and that modern day slavery is heavily present in it (no police on a boat, and hard to escape) I actually have more respect for meat eaters than pescitarians. Don’t eat seafood, folks.

I didn’t say they were good at it, haha! And the “whenever economical” bit is pretty restrictive if you’re in rural Tibet or something.

I mean, the industry itself was onboard with regulation this time. At least some of it.

It didn’t happen in the US because the US is basically in terminal gridlock at this point. The EU passed something.

It’s China, so you’re kind of in a high-security panopticon whenever economical. And oh boy, if you’re mad about Western tech company lock in, you haven’t seen anything yet.

Yep. Really, I think that’s what everyone expected since it carries the same amount of energy, but it’s good to be sure.

Glad to help!

or he possibly stole it during the commotion of the last quarter century of the 1700s.

commie

I see the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, lol.

That right there is one of the stories I’d love to know the details of.

He’s not totally wrong to be bugged about it. He basically is the father of modern free software, and by extension all the non-kernel components of a typical Linux machine, but the setup ended up named after another guy and an obsolete thing from Bell labs.

Ah, the old style of woodwork. People have almost forgotten it now - really, anyone uninterested in history has, although the traditions lasted longer than you’d think - but nails were once expensive. Scraping things to fit and using wood’s natural flexibility can get you a good way, and the fact it shrinks and hardens after being cut down can also be used to great effect. Although, in this case the fact the female part is a full log makes me somewhat doubtful greenwood techniques were used, aside from maybe to make the dowels.

They would have made this thing entirely without power tools as well (so it’s no wonder they skipped the nice finish). Two centuries ago they probably were using modern hand saws and the like, although certain archaic tools like the drawknife could have been in their kit as well.

Huh, very cool! Nobody in the family could remember where mine actually came from. Nobody else knew enough about electronics to be impressed by how old it is, either. Actually I’m lucky it came up.

There’s no markings I can see. If Alladin had a patent on it maybe that would be the place to start looking for the model.

There’s no mechanical relay I can hear and no tube warmup period, but on the other hand it has no boot period and it does behave oddly depending on the quality of mains power (so analog). The person who almost certainly bought it died in the 1970’s.

Ah, okay. There has to be someone out there that’s fully in this material century like that.

You have me beat by a bit if you’re still daily driving it. OS support is getting hard, though.

Wirth’s law seems to have passed Moore’s law sometime around 2010. Or maybe we just ran out of non-gaming problems that are computationally hard. Either way, hardware from the time that isn’t physically broken is still quite usable, if you’ve escaped from the proprietary software treadmill.

You lucky bastard!

I’m guessing metabolism causes the matter in a brain cell to turn over pretty often, even, and new neurons continue to grow throughout your life. Tooth enamel is the only part I know you can be reasonably sure is the same atoms as it’s always been. Eye lenses might have some chemically durable portion, I suppose.

A person is like a river. Always the same thing, but always changing.