What are the most upvoted users of Hacker News commenting on? Powered by the /leaders top 50 and updated every thirty minutes. Made by @jamespotterdev.
That's true of physical reality itself. Everything that happens constantly leaks information to the surrounding, spreading outward at the speed of light.
Point being, there always are side channels.
So here we have again how "Worse is better" works in practice, and how we got here regarding /tmp in 2024.
As the extension spaghetti from OpenGL and Vulkan have proven, alongside with the required software rendering fallback in OpenGL, this doesn't really quite work in practice.
It feels like mainstream technology is slowly replacing most if not all accessibility devices, and I think that's a really good thing for those who need them!
Pretty much everyone eventually suffers from some sort of "disability". Hearing, eyesight, motor control, strength, etc. etc. So, I like to think of accessibility features as being made for everyone. Some people just need them earlier or with deeper functionality than others.
The phrase "kill your darlings" circulates in fiction writing schools. The reasoning is that a "darling" turn of phrase which the author really likes is likely something that they are irrationally obsessed over and that distorts the editing process around itself, to the detriment of overall quality.
Like a lot of writing advice this is really subjective.
Have you done any blind listening tests? I'm having a hard time believing this, though it depends on the bitrate of the AAC.
Why would they say that it needs to be killed? To what end?
I used to think this, but it's no longer true. BBC radio is pretty good value. CBBC is valuable in having an ad-free service for children. But the rest of terrestrial BBC is .. tired. It's not really changed since the advent of streaming services and youtube, which have eaten its audience from younger ages.
And BBC politics is awful. Question Time is full of planted audience members. BBC journos give softball interviews to their friends in the Conservative party.
Personally I'd split the BBC into National Archive (all the material before 2000) and BBC Ongoing, and make the latter into a normal private company which sells streaming subscriptions. And abolish the absurdity of the TV license and its often oppressive enforcement against the very poor.
Imagine what would happen if you put a "who won the US 2020 election?" question on the form.
I do wonder what the politics is that makes this a better deal than, say, Malaysia or Indonesia. Singapore itself is quite close to the equator, and Indonesia spans it.
Better latter than never, ISO C++23 is now an official ISO standard.
Check the current status among C++ compilers, https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support#cpp23
Case in point: Elon Musk. I'm amazed at the quantity and vehemence directed at him in this forum. But I suppose it's just human nature.
> Life doesn't 'find a way' and balance. The ecosystem is damaged, and often times destroyed by adding a single non-native species.
Of course it does. "Ecosystem" and "species" and "native" are human terms referring to categories we invented to make sense of things. Life itself is one ongoing, unbroken, slow-burn chemical reaction at planetary scale. It's always in flux, it's always balanced in myriad ways on some timescales, unbalanced in others.
Even without getting reductive to this degree, there's hardly a case an ecosystem was destroyed. Adding non-native species ends up rebalancing things, sometimes transforming them into something dissimilar to what came before - but it's not like life disappears. The ecosystem is there, just different. Though it sure sucks to be one of the life forms depending on the "status quo".
> That doesn't seem random does it?
Yes, it very much is random. If thermodynamics teaches us anything, it's that random looks quite organized if you zoom out enough and smooth over details.
__init__.py distinguishes (for the import machinery as well as human readers) standard packages from implicit namespace packages, both of which "look like" (and are!) packages.
"Keenly attuned to his guests’ networks and net worths" is a cute turn of phrase.
Watch out for this story, it'll suck you in.
The first question I see is:
1. Draw a line around the number or letter of this sentence.
I have no idea what "the number of this sentence" or "the letter of this sentence" even means.
No. Apart from grammar etc. you‘re missing, you might understand nothing while knowing 80% of the words.
A classic example is Lilienfeld's transistor, in 1925.[1] He built the first three-terminal solid state device, a field-effect transistor, measured some gain, and patented it. But the materials to build better ones, and the theory for understanding what was going on, were decades in the future.
Lilienfeld also invented the electrolytic capacitor, which was manufacturable at the time, so that was more immediately successful.
FOH with that solipsistic nonsense
Wir mussen wissen. Wir werden wissen.
Title gore - "...increases in public support for moderate organizations"
Getting beyond the title, which I definitely agree with (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41896346), there was this nugget about hallucinations:
> I think over the past 18 months, that problem has pretty much been solved – meaning when you talk to a chatbot, a frontier model-based chatbot, you can basically trust the answer
Can't decide if he actually believes this, or he's just spewing his own hype. While I definitely agree the best models have reduced hallucinations, going from, say, 3% hallucinations to .7% hallucinations doesn't really improve the situation much for me, because I still need to double check and verify the answers. Plus, I've found that models tend to hallucinate in these "tricky" situations where I'm most likely to want to ask AI in the first place.
For example, my taxes were more of a clusterfuck than usual this year, and so I was asking ChatGPT to clarify something for me, which was whether the "ordinary dividends" number reported on your 1040 and 1099s is a superset of "qualified dividends" (that is, whether the qualified dividends number is included in the ordinary dividends number), or if they were independent values. The correct answer is that the ordinary dividends number (3b on the 1040) does include qualified dividends (the 3a number), but ChatGPT originally gave me the wrong answer. Only when I dug further and asked ChatGPT to clarify did I get the typical "My mistake, you're right, it is a superset!" response from ChatGPT.
Anybody who says that LLM output doesn't need to be verified is either willfully bullshitting, or they're just not asking questions beyond the basics.
This guide walks you through disabling password authentication for SSH, then walks you through setting up fail2ban.
Using AirPods as ear protection for concerts was new to me!
“Stop winning please.”
China has always been factory to the world recently. Western countries are simply upset they have to compete with a new competitor willing to support, through policy, manufacturing systems at scale for products the world not just wants, but desperately needs.
US enterprises are happy to profit from international business when it’s easy. But having to compete against someone that forces them to rapidly innovate and scale? Too hard.
Right, and you'd assume that if it was widely delivered in Louisiana, there'd be contemporaneous records; what that test is doing is pretty obvious.
I don't know of anyone working in the space that takes that demonstration seriously, but I didn't go digging much; let me know if you find someone. For a lot of cryptography engineers, the mention of "D-Wave" is enough to shut down the inquiry.
If you can convince the other people who own the building to upgrade to a standing seam metal roof in the future, that should avoid repair needs for most original owner lifetimes.
> My comment says ng/mL and nmol/L, and my sources agree
Buddy, I copy pasted ng/mL from your comment. You're correct to have amended it into IUs. (EDIT: Never mind, nothing was amended.)
> he told me quite directly that basically everyone around here should be supplementing vitamin D
Sure. That's medical advice.
As is true with nearly any language. I originally got my ham license back in 1988 when I was a kid (was actually surprised/happy I could remember my original callsign and use that to look up my registration date). I got up to the 13 WPM needed to pass the General license back then, but then I eventually lost interest, especially when I went to college and the Internet (and especially the Web) was in its early stages. I sadly can hardly remember any of the codes these days.
> If I were to write a swe body of knowledge, it would be in koan form, more than likely.
Please do! You can continue with standalone HN comments, which can be upvoted to enlighten human and AI bot alike.
> consider what the result of measuring anything to an infinite precision could possibly look like. It would require somehow recording an infinite amount of information
This is Zeno's dichotomy paradox [1]. Finitely-defined infinitely-complex systems (e.g. fractals and anything chaos theory) are the escape.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes#Dichotomy_p...
People change, life is long. We are all struggling together. Have hope.
> Frank Gehry is arguably one of the world’s greatest living architects.
Oh, please. Have you seen that mess at MIT?
Actually, I wonder what tools he and his people use for design. A floor plan and an elevation are nowhere near enough for those strange shapes. Something like an auto body design tool might be needed.
Yikes. This is not good vs supporting parents and reducing student ratios.
If you want better kids in public school, support parents who have or want kids, and help people who don’t want kids not have them.
If unlocking is made mandatory, the phone subsidies will end. People will be forced to pay full price up front, or else effectively pay more as interest (even if that interest is effectively "hidden" in the overall increased price). So yes, this regulation is exactly about that.
For free-thinkers: https://archive.ph/2024.10.21-205336/https://www.washingtonp...
Kind of a bad smell to make people use a mobile app. I was able to get the Ticketmaster app to install on my iPad actually it works great because you can use the stadium Wi-Fi. I had to argue with security a bit, however, for them to let me into one arena with the iPad.
Back in the 90's we used finger - IIRC it would tell you the last machine someone logged into, which could be in the lab
Someone wrote a script to finger everyone in the entire CS department and tell when the lab was busy, by counting people logged in.
This work fine, except for on intro courses where some labs had lots of non-CS majors in them.
Here I thought they were accidentally or intentionally referring to:
https://babylon5.fandom.com/wiki/Drazi
But now I noticed the spelling difference :/.
> How would you propose to respond to detections, if the cameras all worked?
Facial-recognition scan plus rudimentary SIGINT to identify any e.g. cell phones or devices broadcasting a MAC address. I don't like it, less because of what it means at the border and more in that it requires, for step two, doing the same surveillance across the country. But it's not unsolveable. We just don't particularly have consensus it should be solved.
"Carpet bombing" is perhaps a hyperbolic term, but widespread application of DDT in the southeastern US was, in fact, a central component of the effort.
"Room occupancy sensors" are a common product. Butlr apparently uses a low-rez IR camera, although they avoid calling it that. Passive infrared is common. Millimeter wave is available.[1]
[1] https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/IoT-Commercial-People...
I'm sure @judiciarygop will be equally concerned about this instance.
It's from 2006, before organizations realized that there were lots of trolls willing to dedicate themselves to wasting other people's time over bullshit.
I was really hoping for an answer at the end!
I'm actually totally stumped by the whole thing. OCR doesn't even make sense, because OCR is terrible at handwriting generally. With forms they usually require you to write block letters and numbers inside of a kind of separate grid for each field. And maybe fill in some bubbles too. Anything anywhere on the page outside of the form fields is ignored.
I'd find it far more plausible that they print all letters, those including forms and not, on the same template, and that returned forms get some kind of bar code or status stamped on the bottom upon being received, so they need to keep it empty for that. Kind of like how US envelopes get a little bar code printed on them by post office sorting. I have no earthly idea whether that's closer to the real reason though.
The world has to wake up. We need a second source after DJI for drones. I think of this book
https://www.amazon.com/American-Challenge-Jean-Jacques-Serva...
which pointed out in the late 1960s that Europe was going to fall behind in aviation if they were going to insist that Italian airlines are going to fly Italian airliners and that Europe was only going to be relevant if it took the Airbus route.
In the case of drones there is DJI and then there is... For all the talk of industrial policy, the RoW badly needs another drone maker.
I work four eight-hour days (with a concomitant 20% pay cut), and I'm never going back. I did try a five-day year, after six or so years of a four-day week, but that just made me cement my decision to not work five days.
A two-day weekend is too short, a five-day workweek is too long. 4/3 is the perfect split.
———————————————
Please have not written above this line.
Remember, temporal paradoxes are not covered by your insurer.
> Because a returned letter must be associated with an account / account holder to be processed.
But they didn't ask for the letter to be returned at all.
As impressive as the space efforts in the 60s and 70s were, I've often thought that they were a false start created by a war-like impetus to show off. Tech-wise, we really weren't ready for a space age. The sort of control systems that make this sort of outcome possible haven't been around for all that long, really, especially if you mark them from being economical and not just "it technically existed in a lab somewhere". Plus if you really dig into how these rockets are built and maintained, you see a lot of other technologies that have not been around for that many decades, like, practical and reliable 3D printing, and computing simulations that have more computational power per second than the entire computing world could scrape together in a year in the 1960s, and those are just the highlights, not the exhaustive list.
A lot of people are like "we got to the moon in the 1960s, where's the progress we should have had since then?" but I see the 1960s as the bizarre exception rather than the thing that should be used to set the rule. There was no way the space age was going to happen then, in an era where you're almost sitting there counting each bit of RAM you can afford to send into space. The true Space Age is just dawning now, and it's still early in the dawn; we still have to have massive international cooperation to put a single space station up, we can't do something as basic as refuel in orbit, we just barely started having people in space for commercial rather than governmental reasons... it's just the beginning.
>He doesn't know about Bulgarian split squats
> I generally side with the EFF, but I find the article weirdly duplicitous. It's framed as a criticism of government waste, but would the EFF be happy if the government built a more effective surveillance system at the border? Of course not.
Right. Israel has towers like this. But theirs have guns.[1]
[1] https://www.globalresearch.ca/israels-remote-occupation-wome...
So, the mistakes here are legion:
1. They've taken an expensive-for-the-time premium-brand desktop as (the $2,699 Compaq ProSignia Desktop 330) as a baseline for per-computer price [0], whereas common entry-level models were as little as 1/4 that price around that time [1]. This number is then multiplied by an estimate of unit sales for that year, and adjusted for inflation, to get the $684 billion total (inflation-adjusted to current year) revenue figure. Direct estimates of year 2000 PC revenue seem to be about $226 billion, which adjusted for inflation would be $413 billion in current-year dollars.
2. For internet access revenue they've taken a US DSL offering (BellAtlantic's $59.95 DSL offering) even though in 2000 most users were on dialup (US dialup to broadband [which DSL was considered in 2000, though 2000 DSL wouldn't meet todays broadband definition] ration was over 10:1 [2], and globally presumably that was even higher), adjusted the cost of that service for inflation to current year dollars ($113), multiplied it by the number of global internet users in 2000 to get a (note: already inflation adjusted) revenue estimate of $489 billion for internet access, and then decided that applying a high-end US household offering as the estimate of typical cost per user globally wasn't ridiculous enough, so they decided to treat the $489 billion that was already based on inflation-adjusted per-user cost and as if it were a year 2000 dollars estimate and adjusted it for inflation again to get the estimate of $850 billion in "current year" dollars.
3. As you note, the dubious choice of counting all PC revenue in 2000 as being internet revenue in the first place. People were buying PCs -- for both business and home use -- when most of them weren't connected to the internet; the internet in 2000 wasn't the sole value proposition for computer ownership, even if it was becoming a more significant portion of it.
[0] An odd choice, but one which may be explained by this 2021 article purporting to show the cost of a computer by year by simply picking one "notable" model each year picking the same one for that year: https://www.chicagotribune.com/2021/09/20/cost-of-a-computer... (the article clearly isn't choosing median, common, or comparable models each year, as looking at the individual models and prices makes very clear.)
[1] https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/1999/01/18/da...
[2] https://www.pewresearch.org/chart/broadband-vs-dial-up-adopt...
Whatever "finite set of symbols" humans use to communicate is not the finite set of symbols that form letters or words. Communication isn't discrete in practical sense, it's continuous - any symbol can take not just different meanings, but different shades and superposition of meanings, based on the differences in way it's articulated (tone, style of writing - including colors), context in which it shows, and context of the whole situation.
The only way you can represent this symbolically is in the trivial sense like you can represent everything, because you can use few symbols to build up natural numbers, and then you can use those numbers to approximate everything else. But I doubt it's what Chomsky had in mind.
Note in terms of sources for this number, lots of articles around 2015 discussing the 95% failure rate. This article is from 2 years later, 2017, and the failure rate was still abysmal: https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-fails-tests-latest-undercover-...
> Humanism and environmentalism are at odds more often than they are not.
It gets less surprising when people realize that nature is red in tooth and claw, an uncaring shithole we're evolutionary conditioned to find pretty - at least the parts we see. Beautiful meadows and happy animals and careless people are just propaganda - in reality, the people are sick and busy with back-breaking work, and animals are all on the verge of starvation, and that doesn't even touch the microbiological scale. Ecological balance is achieved by means that, when applied to balance between humans, we'd call unending war of attrition.
Humanism and environmentalism are at odds because nature doesn't care about humans anymore than it cares about anything else. Brutal death and constant suffering are hallmarks of nature.
"Have several children, a driveway full of cars, and a few moving violations..."
Yeah, that's kind of an edge case, there.
Election law is complicated. Even lawyers hedge on these things because it's not as simple as looking up the statute, you have to look up previous court cases, and if it's a case of first impression make a lot of inferences.
Issues I see include whether it is legal to solicit political endorsements which will potentially become campaign materials, in exchange for pay or the prospect of pay, whether it's legal to run lotteries in multiple states (but excluding all others), whether it's legal to influence an election by running such a promotion etc.
The first and second issues make for an interesting combination, because my understanding is that Musk is soliciting people to sign a petition in support of the first and second amendments. Since these are in the constitution of the whole United States, why is his 'lottery' restricted to only 7 states, to the disadvantage of people in the other 43?
Incidentally, Rick Hasen, an election law prof at UCLA, says it's definitely illegal. https://electionlawblog.org/?p=146397
Automakers charge what the be auto market can support. They can limit supply to keep prices high. Used car market is limited by new car market sales. Structural demographics means there are less workers every year (auto repair labor costs). Costs are unlikely to decline.
I suspect the real problem is wind. A last moment gust could push the booster far enough away that it cannot recover.
Yup. For any kind of production app with a table that isn't tiny, you should absolutely never do an ORDER BY RANDOM().
You just need to make sure you're running these queries against a database used solely for occasional analytics, where it's no problem to be saturating the disk for two minutes or whatever, because it won't bother anybody else.
The claim was scoped to the organizations that made the claim: Mozilla, Google, and Microsoft independently claimed that around 70% of their security issues were memory safety related, not that every CVE ever filed was that weighted towards one vulnerability class.
> “believe it is unlikely that the satellite will be recoverable.”
Why do these announcements have to be so hedgy? The satellite is in twenty pieces, I'd think that with the probability of spontaneous reconstruction being so low, we're fairly safe to say "will not be recoverable".
What's absolute position? Isn't all position relative?
Hard disks are great storage mediums when we don't purposely set fire to them to preserve the profits of large corporations. The Internet Archive is perfectly capable of preserving things, unless copyright holders manage to shut them down for short-term profit.
After a few years working in Haskell as a hobby, I came to the conclusion that complicated pattern matching is an antipattern.
I didn't think of it this way at the time, but my current belief is that complicated pattern matching is an extremely tight coupling to what is being matched, and that's not a good thing.
I'm not convinced super powerful pattern matching is even a good idea. I think a lot of the love people have for it is precisely their joy at being about to introduce tight coupling with such syntactical convenience. Syntax affording tight coupling is not a good thing.
(Simple pattern matching, especially on branches of a sum type, is fine and useful, especially when you are doing it precisely because the code will need to be changed if the sum type adds or subtracts other branches, and this need comes from something "real" and not merely false coupling. But the deeper in you go with the pattern match the more whatever it is you are reaching in for should be abstracted out into a function.)
However, another major reason is that people have repeatedly gone seeking for language-like or human-language-level behaviors in animals, and repeatedly and consistently failed.
It is also worth pointing out that detecting language is a great deal easier than understanding language. Something like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvr9AMWEU-c is reasonably recognizable as clearly some sort of language even if we have no (unassisted) human idea what it is saying. We can tell with quite high confidence that most animal sounds are not hiding some deeper layer of information content.
Such exceptions as there are, like whalesong, take you back to my first paragraph, though.
The idea that language is a uniquely human phenomenon may be "dogma", but it is also fairly well-founded in fact. It should also not be that surprising; had another species developed language first, they'd be the ones looking around at their surroundings being surprised they are the only ones with proper language, because they'd probably be the dominant species on the planet. It isn't a "humanist" bias, in some sense that humans are super special because they're humans, it's a "first species to high language" bias, which happens on this planet to be humans.
> The main courses are mandatory in order to obtain the degree.
Very strongly depends on the school and major; there are both narrow-path degrees with lots of mandatory courses and wide-path degrees with very few specifically mandatory courses (instead having several n of m requirements) other than lower-division general education requirements.
The solution, clearly, is a world where those who actually learned the math can use it to cheat the people who didn't.
...which is what we have today, where the most lucrative industries for people with good math skills are finance (= cheating dumb people out of their retirement), advertising (= cheating dumb people out of their consumer dollars), and data-driven propaganda (= cheating dumb people out of their votes).
/dystopia
Having chewed on this for a while now, my personal synthesis is this: The problem with OO is actually a problem with "inheritance" as the default tool you reach for. Get rid of that and you have what is effectively a different paradigm, with its own cost/benefit tradeoffs.
Inheritance's problem is not that it is "intrinsically" bad, but that it is too big. It is the primary tool for "code reuse" in an inheritance-based language, and it is also the primary tool for "enforcing interfaces" in an inheritance-based language.
However, these two things have no business being bound together like that. Not only do I quite often just want one but not the other, a criticism far more potent than the size of the text in this post making it indicates (this is a huge problem), the binding introduces its own brand new problem, the Liskov Substitution Principle, which in a nutshell is that any subclass must be able to be be fully substituted into any place where the superclass appears and not only "function correctly" but continue to maintain all properties of the superclass. This turns out to be vastly more limiting than most OO programmers realize, and they break it quite casually. And this is unfortunately one of those pernicious errors that doesn't immediately crash the program and blow up, but corrodes not only the code base, but the architecture as you scale up. The architecture tends to develop such that it creates situations where LSP violations are forced. A simple example would be that you need to provide some instance of a deeply-inherited class in order to do some operation, but you need that functionality in a context that can not provide all the promises necessary to have an LSP-compliant class. As a simple example of that, imagine the class requires having some logging functionality but you can't provide it for some reason, but you have to jam it in anyhow.
It is far better to uncouple these two things. Use interfaces/traits/whatever your language calls them that anything can conform to, and use functions for code reuse. Become comfortable with the idea that you may have to provide a "default method" implementation that other implementers may have to explicitly pick up once per data type rather than get "automatically" through a subclass inheritance. In my experience this turns out to happen a lot less than you'd think anyhow, but still, in general, I really suggest being comfortable with the idea that you can provide a lot of functionality through functions and composed objects and don't strain to save users of that code one line of invocation or whatever.
Plus, getting rid of inheritance gets rid of the LSP, which turns out to be a really good thing since almost nobody is thinking about it or honoring it anyhow. I don't mean that as a criticism against programmers, either; it's honestly a rather twitchy principle in real life and in my opinion ignoring it is generally the right answer anyhow, for most people most of the time. But that becomes problematic when you're working in a language that technically, secretly, without most people realizing it, actually requires it for scaling up.
You have financial gain to show when proprietary software ends. When FOSS ends, you just have the experience. That’s fine for some, know what you’re getting into.
In moderation, yes. The problem with OOP, like all other paradigms that came before, is applying it dogmatically and excessively, which always happens when there's a lot of hype, novelty, and $$$ to be made.
No.
A Mind Map has labeled edges (and usually only edges, no nodes). It was invented by Tony Buzan and he has a bunch of rules that they have to obey.
A Concept Map had labeled edges between nodes and an education theory behind it. It was invented by Joseph Novak, building on ideas by David Ausubel.
Mind Mapping tools usually produce neither.
The default tone of ChatGPT and the default tone of school or academic writing (at all levels) are not exactly the same, but in the grand vector space of such things, they are awfully close to each other. And all the LLMs have presumably already been fed with an awful lot of this sort writing, too. It's not a surprise that a by-the-numbers report, either in high school or college, of the sort that generally ought to get a good grade because it is exactly what is being asked for, comes out with a high probability of having been generated by GPT-style technology. And I'm sure LLMs have been fed with a lot of syllabuses and other default teacher writing documents, and almost any short teacher-parent or teacher-student communication is not going to escape from same basin of writing attraction that the LLMs write in very easily.
for those debating rust-vs-zig, here is asahi-lina's take: https://vt.social/@lina/113327855904055160
she is mostly hacking on open-source apple-gpu drivers (on apple silicon platform) for linux (not that she needs any introduction in these parts)
Or if English isn't your first language...
Just because the underlying infrastructure works doesn’t mean experimentation isn’t warranted, it’s about how you present the API to the user. Note that the ALI you’ve shown off here is different than the one shown above, maybe one or the other is better to use, hence experimenting with it.
Not only that, but the comment could have been much better: It could be an issue on GH saying "the default location is insecure, please use ~/.cache" or whatnot.
I don't think that's necessarily true, I have a spare TB that I'd be glad to donate to the IA to store whatever they want in.
Yeah, maybe you're right. Excluding the "less violent foreign policy" sibling comment that is also correct, given that the situation had already started, I guess gas isn't a terrible way to handle the situation.
Really terrible about not coordinating with the EMTs, though. They could have saved hundreds of people if they'd just carried Narcan.
Sorry about that. I think CNN is paywalling older articles or something. When I first read it, it was free.
Glad someone else provided the archive.is link.
They are advocating for a holistic approach for safety. But of course, when talking about a specific part of that, they’ll talk about the specifics. With regards to programming languages, memory safety is the next big thing to tackle.
Usually people resort to name calling to divert attention for their lack of sound arguments....
No detail on founding team or investors. Unbounded liability. Compare with real organizations in eldercare:
Commercial: https://lotsahelpinghands.com
Non-profit: https://www.caringbridge.org
The short answer is that news, especially entertainment news, is "push" driven by press releases, and Sony aren't particularly keen to talk about such a disaster.
There's some rumors that the game has seen updates on Steam and is planning a relaunch, but that might just be a Morbius situation.
> I only hope that we get to decide how society responds to that change together .. rather than have it forced upon us.
That basically never happens and the outcome is the result of some sort of struggle. Usually just a peaceful one in the courts and legislatures and markets, but a struggle nonetheless.
> new methods should be used to assess student performance.
Such as? We need an answer now because students are being assessed now.
Return to the old "viva voce" exam? Still used for PhDs. But that doesn't scale at all. Perhaps we're going to have to accept that and aggressively ration higher education by the limited amount of time available for human-to-human evaluations.
Personally I think all this is unpredictable and destabilizing. If the AI advocates are right, which I don't think they are, they're going to eradicate most of the white collar jobs and academic specialties for which those people are being trained and evaluated.
SAG-AFTRA are currently on strike over the issue of unauthorized voice cloning.
The AI advocates actively advertised AI as a tool for replacing creatives, including plagiarizing their work, and copying the appearance and voices of individuals. It's not really surprising that everyone in the creative industries is going to use what little power they have to avoid this doomsday scenario.
Torrents are immutable in principle, which is good for preserving things. A new version of a set of files should be a new torrent.
Has this fraud kept useful work from happening while research went in the wrong direction?
That is an alternative proposal, due to the hate to this one.
And they can be used the same as java.io.File, inside the application sandbox.
Other than that, it boils down to:
" - Squeeze extra performance out of a device to achieve low latency or run computationally intensive applications, such as games or physics simulations.
- Reuse your own or other developers' C or C++ libraries. "
From https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides
And most likely safety, not having C and C++ dealing directly with random bytes from untrusted files.
Not really sure what makes this a "paradox"?
Seems like a lot of words to say that, when you deliver the features users want, then they will continue to want more features. (And all these features keep making users more productive/efficient, so it's a good thing.)
And, of course, more features means more software complexity.
But I'm struggling to see a paradox here, or even what's supposed to be the novel observation.