A CC-177 Globemaster III, in case anyone is wondering what plane.

Like all “heaviest [thing] pulled by person” records, the impressive part of the act was the engineers that designed the wheel bearings (and that the canadian air force let some rando touch a Globemaster III…) but this guy does have some legit impressive lifts to his name otherwise.

… what?

Preanimated takedown moves, from the look if it.

It describes the act of using an AI as the primary method of writing code, as you’re going by the “vibes” you get instead of an actual understanding of what the code does.

IDK, the benefit to the goofy kite design is that the aerial portion is far simpler - and there’s no massive energized cable hanging in the air. It’s a little… non-conventional, but it’s a great deal less complicated than floating a massive generator like the chinese solution. Downside is presumably lower energy density per unit, but the reduction in operational footprint might make the two designs competitive. It’s good people are exploring both options!

everyone else in the comments

You’re trying to misrepresent reality again - go look at the comments (of which 1/2 are now just us two bickering); and fully 1/2 (7/14 (excluding us two), of the (as of posting) 28 total comments (including us two) (edit: this is confusingly worded, I apologize)) of the other comments in this thread are critical of the claims, most of those criticizing how sorry this promise is from China. You can’t just assert easily-verified falsehoods as truth and then claim some kind of victory from that (despite that practically being codified US policy at this point…).

I chose to focus on criticism because they are leading the pack, and their efforts are sad, much like a great many other people in this thread are doing. I suppose a case could be made for that to include their politics, since politics shapes policy, but that’d be a kinda pointless semantic argument to make. My criticism of China has nothing to do with my distatste for the CCP directly and everything to do with them being the #1 global emitter of greenhouse gasses, and then even in lip-service planning to do the barest minimum. I’m not criticizing the US right now because the US is not the leader of the pack, or even relevant in this discussion (beyond being the #2 emitter).

To put in context something, this year if China’s planed 10% reduction had gone through instantly at the start of the year, they would still have produced more than double the greenhouse gas emissions of the US. THEY HAVE TO DO BETTER. We all do, yes, but THEY ESPECIALLY have to do better. It ain’t fucking racism to criticize the #1 culprit for choosing a target that barely does anything.

Let me know if you ever wanna respond to the substance here (to reiterate: criticizing china is absolutely warranted, especially in light of how much better Brazil is doing) instead of issues to take with the form of the argument, it’ll be interesting.

Wrong again.

Bud that’s the whole point here - you’re supporting the group (edit: in this case the CCP) by rejecting legitimate criticism with bad faith meandering (accusations of racism and classic whattaboutisms). Despite your presumed personal position you 100% are supporting the utterly pathetic chinese environmental goals here.

wrong again.

Oh you know what, you’re absolutely right. The article (ten more paragraphs!) wasn’t loading due to their godawful… comment widget? I’m not sure what happened there. BUT I’ll amend my prior claim since Brazil is in there too! And while hardly a western-aligned country, and I am deeply skeptical of their ability to follow through on their claims, I’ll give them credit for thumbing their nose at both the US’ and China’s utterly pathetic showing with those climate targets. Here’s hoping they can stick to them, and that COP30 will follow in their example.

Hardly an article relying on contrasting the US and China, though I suppose quoting Xi that much really does throw some spectacular shade by putting trump’s whole… thing… as contrast.

ah, yes, the good old “you support the CCP because you criticized the US” line.

Uhm… no, I just think you’re arguing in bad faith. That’s been my whole thesis, and it’s maybe worth introspecting that you’ve directly jumped to being persecuted for supporting china instead of the thing I keep criticizing you for.

Sigh. 4 out of 13 of the paragraphs in that article are about trump’s behavior and there isn’t even a mention of another country besides the US and china. Kinda hard to criticize what just isn’t there (at least, if you’re arguing in good faith…)

Shockingly you continue to not address the criticism, just the form of the argument. I can’t imagine why that would be.

I’d be criticizing western countries if this article had been about the western world - but it’s not, so that’s not really relevant commentary. If I showed up to say something like “why aren’t western countries doing better” it would be a valid point, but would absolutely not address the issue - that china is in no uncertain terms absolutely failing the environment. Trying to deflect that with accusations of racism is… transparent, at very least because you have yet to address the criticism but only the form my argument takes.

Why are you so biased that you can’t even accept criticism of a group you support might be legitimate in an article explicitly about the actions of said group? People from the US do that all the time, what makes China special?

Criticizing the most prominent country for still utterly failing (and paying little more than lip-service to the problem) has very little to do with their skin being brown, and everything to do with criticism of the leader of the pack indicting the rest of the pack implicitly. But thank you for delegitimizing everything you might say in response by demonstrating beyond any reasonable doubt that you’re arguing in bad faith.

So are we not allowed to criticize china for their legitimate failures now? It’s all just because we’re butthurt because the US isn’t doing it? Fuck’s sake.

Why? Not disagreeing, just curious if there’s something to base this off of. It’s a whole lot of phones, but old phones are still perfectly functional and cheap as dirt in bulk. You can get 100-phone management racks off alibaba for not too much, so while this setup would be damned large, it’s for sure not impossible to set up for a dedicated enough actor.

And that said it’d be a pain in the ass. Could you replicate the functionality with a broadband radio and a server, maybe?

Did you not just use tab? That’s the usual method of dealing with weird characters in filenames that I’ve found

On US ones as well, I think they just put the relevant key-symbols and excluded the combination press as they can be assumed.

Man, I bet that’s gonna work out just great for you. Hopefully it’s just fraud and not a disability…

I’ve learned never to let my guard down, but I just can’t figure out how this is Loss.

Strangely hard to find volunteers willing to serve papers to a CIWS - they tend to have an extremely persuasive way of responding to bad news.

I was thinking of the RCC tiles, probably should have considered that the white ones would just be health problems city. But the carbon fibers in the RCC ones are bound pretty completely in graphite, so from all the reading I just did (please help me I desperately need a job all this free time is going to kill me) it should be safe to eat those so long as they’re not reduced to, say, a fine dust. Ground down to the consistency of cornmeal though, I can’t find anything that indicates it would be a particular risk?

I think we can work with that, I’ve got a couple shuttle O-rings (not those ones) you could absolutely consume without issue. It’s probably not good to eat sharp parts like screws, but chunks of the heat tiles could be put in a pepper mill and used as a topping that way, or as a filler in a dense baked good like a scone. You could also eat any of the shielding foils, the gold foil used to protect against radiation especially would be totally safe and quite decorative.