Just came across this beautiful video of Richard Feynman.

That’s not how physics works. If you are really interested in such issues read a book on foundations of physics or history of physics to see how physicists arrived at the most famous equations (Einstein,Dirac, Schroedinger or Newton), they are basically “bets” guided by physical and mathematical assumptions, but that is far from being “proved” or “derived”, there are no rigorous proofs or derivations involved. The uncertainty remains until an experiment or observation confirms it or rejects it. There’s no such a thing as “proving” a physical theory, for the simple reason that any physical theory works in a limited regime or range of validity. Newtonian gravitation and General Relativity are both valid and succesfull theories within their range of validity, but they contradict each other mathematically, in one theory gravity is a scalar field and in the other is a tensor field, so you could use the mathematics of one theory to refute the other, so it makes no sense the concept of proving a physical theory mathematically. You only try to axiomize a theory once is well established, but it’s irrelevant concerning its validity.

“The bonus of string theory is that it has the tenets of a unified theory of all interactions, electro-magnetism, weak and strong interactions, and gravitation” https://arxiv.org/pdf/0809.1036

You have no idea what you are talking about. You can’t prove mathematically Einstein’s equations. No fundamental equations in physics were proved mathematically.

I am a physicist. String theory already unified QFT and GR and that doesn’t mean it’s a verified physical theory, you need to validate it through experiment. It’s physics 101. Just watch some Sabine H. videos to see how she speaks about string theory being a failure besides being mathematically consistent.

Although the theory is promising, the duo point out that they have not yet completed its proof

Physics is not math, you can’t “prove” a physical theory. You make predictions and through experiment or observation Nature has the last word.

Tell them how governments, employees and scammers buy from data brokers the data collected from apps in their phones to surveil, blackmail or scam them. Do a research and send them a good summary with the links. When a told my brother in law about this, he was stunned. He’s still using his phone as always lol, so don’t have too much expectations.

“Good morning daughter, how it was the date last night? great motel uh? ;)”

Your toxic partner: “What were you doing at that cafe at 5:42 PM”

The carrier can track a phone without sim card but it’s not the case if you turn on airplane mode. The whole point of airplane mode is to prevent the phone from emitting any signal to avoid interference with critical aircraft instruments. I don’t see any company risking to circumvent such a critical security feature, it would be easily verifiable.

A center in two dimensions, in three dimensions an axis, in more dimensions…

The whole point is that there’s no need so send audio, it would be childish to do so.

Twelve years ago Moto X was launched by Motorola, at that time controlled by Google. I had it and at any moment you could say “Hello Google, what time is it?” and it responded. I was constantly listening. All the time. And it was a perfectly normal phone regarding battery life or data usage. TWELVE years ago, imagine how much easier would be to implement that now, with more powerful and efficient chips and bigger batteries.

From an article about Moto X back then: “If you want to take a selfie, you should be able to simply say “Take a selfie!” In short, your smartphone should live up to its name. That’s the goal with the Moto Voice and Moto Assist software integrated into the second generation Moto X smartphone. And to do that, the Moto X is always listening, for verbal commands from the user and also ambient cues of the context. That emergent behavior is spawned by complex interactions between the software and hardware”

Only much latter I came to the conclusion that with Moto X Google was making its first tests on using the microphone for mass surveillance.

It gives me exactly the same message but I’m not using a VPN. When I use the external viewer option with mpv using yt-dlp I only get video without audio. I can download the video fine using yt-dlp and then watch it with mpv, but if I try to stream to mpv while downloading to watch it real-time it gives an ffmpeg error: can’t recognize format… weird.

I ended up buying an ASUS BT400, it works out of the box in Linux. I found it here

What do you mean by “average number of pages”? Average over what?

Searching “github download webpage video” gives this and more results to try.

Here is how you can run the 671B model without using graphic cards for about $6.000. Here is the post on X.

What about using TOR instead of a VPN?

Stealing revenue it’s hypothetical, because it supposes that you were going to pay for the product if it wasn’t available pirated. And that is far from being certain.