Well we write 12 like this: 10

It’s easy

Miss you with the greatest passion

No, it’s observation. An experiment involves manipulating an independent variable while controlling other variables. There’s none of that in space, not counting the ISS and Apollo. That said, you can still test hypotheses using observation. And that’s equally true in both astronomy and in social sciences.

That’s irrelevant. Astronomy and polsci can both only test their hypotheses through observation.

What are soft sciences supposed to do when experimental methods are either impractical or unethical?

Same thing astronomy did.

Hey genius, if you need experimentation in order for a field to be a real science, then explain how astronomy is a science.

It’s mainly called social science in my country.

Same with Astronomy.

These pods are only used on rails with very low ridership. They would switch to a train if ridership increased.

Look at it this way: you can have a train that has a capacity of 100 people, but it only runs once a day due to the low demand, and only 2 people want to ride it at that time of day…Or you can have 10 pods, which do not require as much railway maintenance, and they can carry the 10 people who actually want to use this railway, completely on demand.

Yeah, a train is better if you want to move ten thousand people a day at peak hour. But this is a cheaper way to move ten people at different times across a day. And it’s a cheaper way of inducing the demand that would justify the more efficient kind of expansion.

So you’re saying you can’t write readable code while drunk

The world of matter is an illusion created by the mind. The true reality of the world is a network of conscious agents. Everything really is alive.

Hey, we still laugh at scientists who propose good ideas

The pun works equally well in English. “Aw, man!” has the same meaning as Ach mensch.

Taxonomy is a conspiracy invented by neckbeards so they could “um ackshually” us when we call a bug a bug.

I have excellent colour vision but I still struggle with this because it’s hard to remember which shade of green is which when flipping between the map and the legend

“Wow,” says a puddle in a ditch. “This ditch is shaped exactly like me. If it weren’t for the ditch’s precise shape, I couldn’t have formed here. I’m really lucky.” The puddle, of course, has never seen a puddle in a different ditch and never realised that puddles come in many shapes.

Watch Don’t Look Up. It’s about an asteroid heading for earth in our current political climate

If I built a robot pigeon that can fly, scavenge for crumbs, sing matings calls, and approximate sex with other pigeons, is that an AGI? It can’t read or write or talk or compose music or draw or paint or do math or use the scientific method or debate philosophy. But it can do everything a pigeon can. Is it general or not? And if it’s not, what makes human intelligence general in a way that pigeon intelligence isn’t?

I still think AI has its place as a useful term in video games development