nanocyto t1_j9pjukr wrote on February 23, 2023 at 5:38 PM

Reply to comment by override367 in Google case at Supreme Court risks upending the internet as we know it by dustofoblivion123

I'm suggesting that book stores can be held liable for what books they put out. I can think of all sorts of material you wouldn't want them to curate like a section dedicated to people trying to figure out how to start trafficking

nanocyto t1_j9lpkr9 wrote on February 22, 2023 at 9:49 PM

Reply to comment by override367 in Google case at Supreme Court risks upending the internet as we know it by dustofoblivion123

>they do under 230

I disagree. One of the requirements for 230 is that it isn't your content but the page you serve is content provided by your servers. If your server was just a corridor and just relayed the information, I'd agree (and I think that's the intent of the law) but it created a page. That organization is a form of content.

nanocyto t1_iy5vy4y wrote on November 28, 2022 at 11:50 PM

Reply to comment by RLDSXD in Depictions of atomic nuclei often show distinct and individual protons and neutrons, is this accurate? by ZTYTHYZ

This feels like an unnecessary complication. Billiard balls also use virtual particles to repel each other. Strictly speaking, billiard balls also use probability in terms of their position. There's some probability that they'll quantum tunnel across each other and end up passing through each other instead of colliding, it's just so rare that we don't have to account for it when playing a game. So, I think the useful perspective is probably "what experiments would I mess up if I used a marble approximation instead of the full quantum treatment of a nucleus."