Didn’t be obtuse.

To fix your logic “It would be a failure if his goal was to keep his movement alive at any cost”. That clearly wasn’t his goal.

Or have I missed the point entirely, and this is not a discussion but some point scoring thing based on digestible one liners.

It’s not a failure, he made a choice. In hindsight we see it as the wrong choice, but we don’t know what the alternative is. We will never know if it was right or wrong, failure or success.

Nothing is ever so simple.

Cold turkey worked for me. Took me 4 attempts. I wasn’t hard on myself for failure, I noted what happened (emotional trauma, stress, alcohol) and prepared myself for the next attempt.

I wanted to quit, so when I relapsed it’s not because I wanted to smoke but because those little cancer stick bastards were trying hardest to kill me. But if they were going to be tough, I could be tougher. I found it easier when I could see the cigs as my enemy.

Look, I don’t want to disagree with your point… But I can’t stand by as you suggest that we evolved from cave men… We may have created civilisations, but we’ve not evolved into a civilized creature… We’re still as uncooked as were 60k years ago.

10 years ago I learnt that southern New Zealand slang uses bespoke or custom as an indicator of poor quality. Someone shittly welded a tow ball onto their car, that’s a ‘custom job’.

Your poorly assembled second hand IKEA bookshelf that’s falling apart and well fucked? A bespoke piece of furniture.

Those words have never bothered me since. Thanks kiwis.

The correct response to this is to ask them to move their bag and sit next to them, whilst there are other empty seats next to other people nearby.

Punish their greed.

Can’t be solved, says only country in the world where it happens regularly.

Well your first statement is a subtle strawman. Ross said this way is the only way, because no one else is trying, not that it was the right way.

Secondly, fallacy fallacy, just because it’s a false dichotomy doesn’t mean it’s not also correct. Can anyone just start up another initiative now? Not technically, but practically. Or would any serious attempt just join this movement to add to the momentum. Then if this fails, when can another attempt be made, how long till the ‘political will’ burnt by this campaign is regenerated?

I can’t say I know what I’d do if I were in your situation. But many people throughout history have chosen to write those books, and they have suffered for that choice, but they have also driven change.

Things change slowly then all at once.

Which is to say, the older generations are very set in their ways, but the new generations can be completely different.

You say you can write a book, maybe you should. Detail all the things you see and don’t like. Give me a voice to the people who think like you.

I see war memorials as a reminder of what we’re trying to avoid, not as a glorification.

No, I am not sure that I am.

Photonic processing, whilst very cool and super exciting, is not a quantum thing… Maxwells equations are exceedingly classical.

As for the rest it’s transistor design optimisation, enabled predominantly by materials science and ASMLs EUV tech I guess:), but still exploits the same underlying ‘quantum 1.0’ physics.

Spintronics (which could be what you mean by 2D) is for sure in-between (1.5?), leveraging spin for low energy compute.

Quantum 2.0 is systems exploiting entanglement and superposition - i.e. qubits in a QPU (and a few quantum sensing applications).

[radioactive decay triggered the poison gas?]

[Quantum hype train?]

[Imposter syndrome?]

Good question. It would be application specific. I think evanescencnt wave coupling in EM radiation is considered " very classical" (whatever that actually means). But utilizing wave particle duality for tunneling devices is past quantum 1.0 (1.5 maybe?). However, superconductivity tunneling in Josephson junctions in a SQUID is closer to quantum 1.0, but 2.0 if used to generate entangled states for superconducting qbits for quantum computing.

Clear as mud right?

Can we trade?

Oh my sweet summer child, a 100x yes, if only it were possible.

But more seriously, if you’re doing EE, the world of quantum is your oyster. Specialize in RF/MW design and implementation, we use it for qubit control, and you’ll be highly valuable.

Quantum Physics Postdoc here. Although technically correct this is also somewhat misleading. You need the band structure of solids, which is due to quantization and Pauli exclusion principle. The same quantum mechanics that explains why we did those strange electron energy levels for atoms in highschool. The majority of quantum mechanics, however, is not required: coherence, spin, entanglement, superposition. In the field we describe semiconductors as quantum 1.0, and devices that use entanglement and superposition (i.e. a quantum computer) as quantum 2.0, and smear everything else in-between. This

I mean you last line sums it up, If on your balance you can weight the sum total of human systematic logical effort against your anecdotal experience then what is the point of discussion at all?

And you want to know when that looks really ugly? When the faithful see things like “the light and hope brought by faith” and are blind to rivers of blood and human suffering that have not ceased to this day enabled and perpetuated by faith.

It doesn’t matter if there is a god, by the things done in God’s name the concept of faith must be reject for humanities sake.

The entitlement of some people the moment they have a car. “Somebody took 20min of my time, they literally deserve 5 years in jail and to be assaulted in public.”. You’re sick, nothing your doing is important, sit in traffic and seeth. If you don’t like it, take the train.

Also a physicist, and I can confirm that we are all as dumb as rocks.

You’re right, it doesn’t at all capture how disturbing the reality is.

Ignored privacy settings; unknown third parties can train AI models on data scrapped from private images and video host on common social media platforms.