HN user
I always figured the bartender was just another philosophy or sociology or political science major who couldn't find a better job. Which I'd say is also a relevant modern issue. I know plenty of college students and grads working shit jobs.
It's more of a trial and error kind of play. It really helps to quick save/quick load a lot to figure out what you can get away with.
really finicky
Is it finicky? The stealth system is very basic and based on line-of-sight and sound (for human enemies). As long as you aren't running, it's actually incredibly trivial to stealth through levels without being seen. Even the bots aren't really a problem, since they have static patrol paths and limited line of sight.
On the other hand, for us "tech people" it is actually easier to stop using Google and Apple and serve as example for others. Pushing for anti-monopoly legislation needs not be the only thing that we do to solve that problem.
Are you suggesting people stop using smartphones altogether?
Addendum:
A slightly different example. Internet Explorer essentially dominated the browser space for nearly forever until Chrome. There are any number of reasons, but the most obvious is that Microsoft could leverage their position as the platform owner to promote IE over all alternatives. EU tried to regulate it by forcing them to add a "browser choice" dialog, which didn't work. The only reason why Chrome became so popular was because Google did exactly the same thing as Microsoft. They could leverage their search engine, which by that time already owned 90% of the search engine market, to aggressively promote Chrome at every single opportunity.
There are all these examples of tech companies leveraging an existing platform to edge out competitors in clearly anti-competitive ways, and modern laws simply aren't up to the task of ensuring a fair, competitive market where massive companies like Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon can't abuse their power.
Apple wants to own iPhone consumers so that anyone who wants access to that demographic must pay the toll and follow their rules. It's far too much power for one corporation. Nice to see authorities are starting to take the matter seriously.
Unfortunately, this seems like a problem where nobody has come up with a good solution. Google allows other app stores on their phones and they allow sideloading, which might seem like the ideal situation. The biggest issue then is that Google still has the monopoly on apps on Android because the size of the Play Store far eclipses every other store. So if Google bans an account or app unfairly, the only realistic option is to appeal and cave in whatever they want you to do. Because being relegated to an app store that nobody uses is essentially a death sentence for that app and its revenue.
How do you fix something like that? The power or the problem doesn't go away because there is choice. I feel like Google has neatly sidestepped the problem from their perspective and thus aren't being scrutinized, despite being in nearly the exact same situation as Apple.
There are seedbox services that allow public torrents and don't forward DMCA emails.
1) There are plenty of paid apps: https://appfigures.com/top-apps/ios-app-store/united-states/...
2) Taking his argument in good faith, he also means "free" apps with microtransactions, because in both cases the same situation exists: The iOS App Store is too big a market to ignore. Which leads to the same problem, regardless of whether your app is paid or "free", that if Apple suddenly decides it doesn't like you, you're screwed.
The first neural networks appeared in the 50s (with significant limitations), and proper research into them and appropriate funding first started in the 80s. NN's didn't become a thing overnight, and neither will this. I'm not sure why you're expecting this thing to be proven now. Science is slow. It takes time to build evidence and "prove" things and figure out how useful a model is.
You do realize you can't just jump straight into "Let's see if this thing can drive a car", right? There's years of research and development that's going to happen before anything like that. And it's not like they're designing this to get a car-driving AI. They're trying to find an accurate model of the brain. Maybe, if results are promising, this can be turned into something like that in 10-20 years, but I wouldn't count on it. Maybe sooner if it turns out to be particularly promising. Chances are this is going to radically evolve in different directions. They might hit dead-ends. They might make valuable insights about how some parts of the brain work, but can't generalize it or go from there to a general problem solving intelligence. There are all manner of problems, and I don't think you realize how complex the brain actually is when you're starting from first principles like this. They're at the level of simulating what individual neuron clusters do. That's like looking at electrons interacting and expecting to build a bridge by manipulating them individually.
A cursory glance at Japanese culture and values shows me that America has had far less influence on its development than you believe. On the scale of individuality/community, Japan is further on the opposite side. The anime/manga industry is quite different than anything we have in the West, and a lot of their values tie into the things that are depicted, what's okay, what's not okay, etc. We often see traditional influences on their media that simply don't exist in the West in the same way (comparison of the American and Japanese versions of The Ring: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01956051.2011.5...).
This is similar to the idea that a number isn't always a number. A number can be categorical, in which case comparison operators don't make any sense. They can be a label or a name, in which case addition or other mathematical operators don't make any sense. The same way a number can be an address, which has its own sets of operations that operate on the idea of an address.
As an example, statistics has the idea of ordinal values vs interval values, where they have different properties that make them not comparable to each other and shouldn't be mistakenly be confused when working on them.
I mean, the whole point of implementing this would be to see what insights can be gained.
From the study:
The basic operations of the Assembly Calculus as presented here—projection, association, reciprocal projection, and merge—correspond to neural population events which 1) are plausible, in the sense that they can be reproduced in simulations and predicted by mathematical analysis, and 2) provide parsimonious explanations of experimental results (for the merge and reciprocal project operations, see the discussion of language below)
This was an initial study, and I'm sure they're going to continue putting out papers exploring the model and how it compares with experimental data. It's not like everybody's going to see this one study and say "He's right! We should all use this model!" It's more that as more evidence is provided, the model becomes more relevant and it might be considered by others to be useful.
Computational modelling is already something that's fairly widespread for trying to understand the brain. The only novel thing here might be how his model is designed.
On the other hand, brain as a computational entity is a theory that's been around for a long time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_theory_of_mind
Despite being vigorously disputed in analytic philosophy in the 1990s due to work by Putnam himself, John Searle, and others, the view is common in modern cognitive psychology and is presumed by many theorists of evolutionary psychology.
The theory is quite foundational for cognitive science and popular in a number of other fields.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_science#Computationa...
So it's not like he's doing anything fundamentally new. He's maybe come up with a new computational model that might give new insights.
I thought it was an isolated issue until a saw a few streamers hit the same kind of issue and casually explain they forgot to reboot their switch.
Interesting, thanks. I sold my Switch after a year, so I've only been following up on it intermittently and missed this.
My angle on it is pretty similar to when the iPhone came out. There was no copy and paste, multi-tasking and was arguably slow for a lot of things, but the pros outweighed the cons, and we knew Apple wouldn't be doing any big leaps any day soon.
I was okay with the Switch's OS in the beginning because I figured, sure, they rushed this to market, but this is a relatively solid basis to keep building and improving on. None of which happened. Queue my frustration with Nintendo.
I do feel by comparison iOS has made leaps and bounds (though admittedly, depending on what features you wanted, it might have taken longer than you might have wanted). I've since switched to Android (again), but I think there was a very long period where I'd stay up to watch the Apple conference revealing the new phones and iOS features, even when I didn't have any Apple device. As far as I can remember, every year brought significant changes, though of course I can't point out what they were for every year. The introduction of the concept of files and a file manager made iOS much more palatable to me, for example.
edit: https://www.theverge.com/2011/12/13/2612736/ios-history-ipho...
Wanted to take a look. iOS 4 added multitasking. iOS 5 added the notification center, iTunes wifi sync, OTA updates, iMessage. iOS 6 added, uh, .... the beloved Apple Maps? iOS 7 was the visual overhaul, added the control center (which I miss on Android), AirDrop, Camera and Photos were improved, multitasking was greatly improved, TouchID was added, apps automatically updating added.
Seems like there was a fairly steady stream of improvements almost every year. SwitchOS hasn't seen anything remotely close. Of course, Apple is a much larger company and has a much larger budget, but still, I think regardless of how large or small a company, it should be capable of yearly improvements from whatever place they're at any given time.
Specifically, we use comparisons of maximum-likelihood fit as well as standard deviation analysis and diffusion entropy analysis to show that visual search during language comprehension exhibits Lévy-like rather than Gaussian diffusion.
That is fascinating. Thanks for that.
However, one could argue, from an evolutionary standpoint, that spe-ciÿc search mechanisms could have been learned and “wired” in order to improve theexploration eciency (e.g., if a salient point is located within a direct vision distance,maximize the probability of straightforwardly moving to that site)
As far as the Facebook team knew, Tails developers were not aware of the flaw, despite removing the affected code. One of the former Facebook employees who worked on this project said the plan was to eventually report the zero-day flaw to Tails, but they realized there was no need to because the code was naturally patched out. "
So there's no way for anybody to verify that the code is actually being removed, or that the exploit won't crop up again in the future. I don't trust them or the FBI at all in this.
Considering the variety of animals that seem to show this behavior, isn't it possible that mammals, specifically humans, are "encoded" with that same random search pattern? I'm not sure how you'd test for it though.
It does, actually. No ePub I've seen places the images in between text in a satisfying way. PDF's are designed in a certain layout to account for images and keep that design no matter what I'm viewing it on.
Germany's the home of the CCC. I'm sure people will be scrutinizing it.
but the stability improvements seemed real. At some point the Switch had to be rebooted every other day
No idea what you're talking about.
For QOL the last big update allowing to remap buttons was a big deal. I haven't tried moving data between to the SD card but it would also be a big deal for people with more than 10 ~ 20 games, as space becomes scarce pretty fast.
My point is that the amount of real QOL changes is extremely low for the amount of time the console has been out. There's been nearly nothing, while they just keep "increasing stability".
Frankly, the Switch's OS is still incredibly barebones and missing a lot of QOL features and I'm tired of people defending Nintendo for being so half-assed about the Switch. It's been three years. There's been barely any progress, whether it's the OS, online infrastructure, or fixing the drift issues. Do they have Yakuza debts they need to pay off or what? Where's all the money going to?
So, you could place image in right place in your ePub book in same way as you place images on your website.
I've never seen an ePub with images where it looked anywhere as good as the PDF version. It's generally a mess.
I read a fuckton of papers and non-fiction literature with images. ePub simply isn't useable in these cases. If I'm reading something with no images or graphs or anything, then fine. I'll use ePub, otherwise, no.
I'm not sure what the alternative is supposed to be. ePub is reflowable, fine, but it absolutely chokes on placing images. At least with PDF's, I get the book in a form that was designed by a human being to be read by a human being.
each updates has user facing features with QOL improvements
You must be joking. The meme about "stability intensifies" with Switch updates isn't just a joke. Most of their updates are minor bugfixes and "increasing stability" (fixing exploits). They're far more interested in fixing exploits than they ever were in improving the OS in any meaningful way for the user. It's been 3 years and the only major QOL change I see on that list is making the all software page not useless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Switch_system_softwar...
Apparently it's being removed in January 2021.
https://www.chromium.org/flash-roadmap#TOC-Flash-Support-Rem...
I've always found it a bit odd (and a bit frustrating) that many programs around knowledge-building/note-taking are Mac-only. Anybody know why that is? Devonthink sounds like such an interesting tool that I'd love to try, but it's Mac only. This article's author relies on two tools which, at first glance, are also Mac-only.
That said, am I the only one finding it really hard to parse pages of illustrations? It feels like I'm stuck having to analyse every single illustration to figure out what the author is talking about and that a bit of supporting expository text is missing.
I'm also interested in what software you're using for this. I've looked into tools that support Zettelkasten and they all seem to have made inexplicable changes to the system. The most significant to me is the change from using a hierarchical, meaningful numbering scheme to using timestamps that lack all form of context/hierarchy. Context in the sense that unless you're the Rain Man, there's no way to fit timestamps into a conceptual framework to refer to in your mind. You're always 100% reliant on your tools to find what you need.