He did not cause a serious hazmat situation. The authorities decided to evacuate a street, and are responsible for the seriousness of their over-reaction.
The packages were labelled correctly, and blocked at the border, and USPS delivered them anyway. He offered to send them back as soon as he was made aware they weren’t permitted.
The real failure here is at the border, where they were flagged and then let through, followed by the absurd over reaction of the authorities to a situation they’d enabled
USPS is United States Postal Service. They didn't deliver the package once it was received in Australia.
Or does Australia's postal service have the initials USPS too? Not being a pedant, just don't know. (Aside: UK entirely privatized their postal service which is sad given history and doesn't seem to be working out so well.)
They knew, or should have known. They knew exactly what he had bought and in what quantity, and anyone who knew anything about radioactive material would have concluded it was safe, or if they had doubts, they would have sent maybe two people to go knock on his door and ask to look around.
This was someone or a small group inside the border force who didn't have a clue what they were doing, cocked up, tried to make a big showy scene of things, and then scrambled to save face after the actual experts clued them in that a) what he had was safe and b) was 100% legal to own. (note that he was prosecuted for something that the border force allowed through years before the sample they erroneously thought was a problem, and that was not illegal to own, only illegal under a very twisted interpretation of an obscure law to import).
Also, the question shouldn't be "Did they know it was harmless?" It should be "Did they know it was harmful?" You don't initiate a huge hazmat incident, close off homes and evacuate people just because "you're not sure it was harmless." You do that when you know it's harmful.
The hazmat crew was literally manufactured drama for a prosecutor (who somehow continues not to be named in this ridiculous case) to build a better case.
If not, how do we mitigate those increases without CDR?
Maybe we don't, and the magical CDR unicorn isn't going to come and save us. I don't mean to speak for parent, but CDR is the "least effective way", yet many are speaking as if it's the most viable solution. And maybe it is, because $DEITY forbid that a dollar of CO2-producing profit be left on the table, but if that's the case then we are most certainly doomed.
Based on the title, I was expecting this article to have instructions for calibrating an air quality sensor, rather than just explaining different error types.
This post is part of a series of posts. We already wrote a few posts about sensor calibrations, e.g. how to develop a correction algorithm for temperature [1] or how to use R for making a linear regression [2].
In one of the next topics we will dive more into PM correction and the sensitivity to relative humidity.
If you want to know more about the science of air quality monitoring, we are also running webinars that you can watch on our reserach page [3].
Medical leeches are still very much a thing. They’re used to help improve venous circulation after plastic surgery around reattached body parts, help with burn recovery, etc
> Is there really a difference between a human flooding the market using AI and a human flooding the market using a printing press?
Yes. A printing press only floods the market with copies. An AI floods the market with new derivative works.
A human producing a single creative work and then flooding the market with copies leaves lots of room for other humans to produce their own novel work. An AI flooding the market with new derivative works leaves no such room.
I work with DNNs a lot professionally and remain a proponent of the technology, but what OpenAI et al are doing is highly exploitative and scummy. It’s also damaging their social licence and may end up setting the field back.
It’s potentially nice for the consumer. If I could get personalised audio and video content created on demand for me, that would be pretty amazing. But it does disincentivise people from creating content rather than just consuming it, and I think that could end up taking away a lot of the magic from life.
Parents often let their children struggle and make imperfect decisions, and it's entirely possible (though definitely not guaranteed) that an AI superparent would do the same for us.
I think it's becoming clear that humans are fundamentally incapable of forseeing and understanding the consequences of the actions we are now capable of taking. It is likely that without some sort of super-governance that is fundamentally more capable than humans, we might not be able to survive as a species. Maybe AI can help solve that.
In the article they talk about using artificial electromagnetic fields as an alternative to sticking random antennas in the soil, which apparently works well too
The packages were labelled correctly, and blocked at the border, and USPS delivered them anyway. He offered to send them back as soon as he was made aware they weren’t permitted.
The real failure here is at the border, where they were flagged and then let through, followed by the absurd over reaction of the authorities to a situation they’d enabled
reply