Ghostt8117

https://www.macrumors.com/guide/butterfly-keyboard-issues/

Also, I'd like to note that my 6 year old Honda Civic has a recall and they are required by law to repair the issue free of charge to the consumer. I know laptop failure won't result in potential death, but customers should be protected from poorly designed products that fail. No other laptop or desktop I have ever used has had keyboard issues.

They stopped covering the keyboard issue 4 years from purchase date, which was only a year ago. Also, we thought we were buying a 2019 model. We did not know it was a 2017 model.

I appreciate that you are elaborating further on your issues with the paper. I, again, am not choosing to defend the paper itself, rather the reason for science - asking questions and finding answers, even ones that may not be "worthwhile." Because we do not always know what is worthwhile and often we ignore some important facts when we think, intuitively, something makes sense and there is no reason to study it.

But, I will counter your comparison regarding LLMs and the transfer rate of wires. We, humans, have wired up the LLM ourselves. Evolution wired our body/brain and we do not know all of the filters and connections that exist in the transfer and processing of data. There is so much about the body we do not know. With LLMs, we've created every part so it doesn't really compare.

And to say that fields of science should not consider the knowledge gleaned from other fields is preposterous. I read about a new discovery in Math almost every few months in which a person from a different field brought in different techniques and looked at a problem from a new angle. Maybe this framing of the problem is silly in the end, or maybe it is just what someone needs to read somewhere to spark an idea. It doesn't hurt to think about it.

I realized that I do have institutional access and so I was able to read the paper, and I stand by my initial criticism of the above comment.

"It seems to me all this paper does is define tasks in a highly abstract way that imposes a uniform cost to process '1 bit of task information'."

The paper uses this number and acknowledges that it is not the only possible measure, and explains why they use this number and how it was derived. It is just the start of the paper, not "all this paper does." The paper primarily focuses on counterarguments to this number to then address the primary question of the relationship between the inner and outer brain.

A few questions it poses: does the superior colliculus contribute to a bottom-up "saliency map" to ultimately direct the attentional bottleneck in cognition? Why does the brain use the same neural circuitry for both rapid/parallel sensory processing and slow/serial cognition? This is not even how other parts of the body work (e.g., type I and II muscle fibers). Perhaps the associated routing machinery between input and output accounts for the billions of neurons? Maybe, like the visual cortex, the prefrontal cortex has a fine-grained organization of thousands of small modules each dedicated to a specific microtask?

We do ourselves the most favors by reading research with some skepticism, and asking questions. We do ourselves no favors by writing comments after only reading an abstract (please, tell me if I'm wrong). I only point out that discounting research so blithely does nothing for improving research. This was a perspective paper - an author asking questions to better understand a possible issue and guide research. And maybe the commenter is right, maybe this is the wrong focus, but I do not believe it was truly considered.

This type of comment is my least favorite on HN. "Seems quite trivial," "non-sequitur to compare them," "foolish." I am not able to read the paper as I do not have access, but the published perspective has 131 citations which seem to consider everything from task-specific human abilities, to cortical processing speeds, to perception and limb movements and eye movements, and so on.

I'm glad you thought about it too, but to assume that the authors are just silly and don't understand the problem space is really not a good contribution to conversation.

I love SumatraPDF. I've used it for years and it is wonderful. I have been writing Latex in vim and I compile with the document open in sumatra side by side for instant updates. Very smooth workflow with the instant reload of the page.

Yes, you are an investor. You do not live in the home you purchased. You rent it to earn money, i.e., an investment.

This creates a huge problem. Rental properties have different regulations in different places. My brother-in-law was not given a lease renewal amnd was forced to move (within 30 days) while, where I live, that is illegal unless there is cause for eviction. It creates instability. Also, my rent increased $550/month in just two years. Who can afford that? This creates a tenuous housing issue. Thankfully, I was able to move and buy a very small condo so I have a set monthly payment and no longer need to worry about losing my home every year when my lease ends.

There is a huge difference in how I can plan for the future knowing I am not going to be, potentially, homeless every year.

Something that doesn't get discussed often when there is an issue is a possible solution. We all just complain or make fun of those who lose out. But the issue here is that sudden changes are a problem. No company should face sudden unexpected tax changes. It creates an unstable business environment and owners cannot adequately plan for the future. Congress needs to extend this write-off for a few years and make it clear that it will not be available in the future. They cannot leave it as a "maybe" situation.

I have personal opinions on this matter that are irrelevant. What matters for the future is how this affects the U.S. competitive advantage with technology, and how this affects the job market. If the impact is significant, Congress needs to act. If not, i.e. if only a few smaller companies are affected, then nothing will change and everyone needs to adjust.

I fell for this using Adobe stock photos. I did not see anywhere that I signed up for a monthly plan as I was only getting free credits to use. Well, a few months later and I noticed the charges on my credit card bill. It took me a few hours but I was able to get back all of my money. Not until after, though, the representative on the phone cursed at me and told me I was an idiot for not realizing what I signed up for. This was a few years back and I no longer use any Adobe product and never will again.

Is this autobiographical or a work of fiction? Yes. He does not trust in the reality of his own words. Why should you?

I have read much of his writing, though far from even most of it. Even if I had read all of it, I know my answer would be the same.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-preventi...

This study used cognition, productivity, decision-making, and well-being as outcomes. It did not discuss the economic effects related to deleterious health from long-term sleep deprivation. Is higher productivity and output from increased time at work and decreased sleep time outweighed by the burden taken on by society from the other effects? I worry that some people will see this research and use it to feel better about making their employees work more hours and exploiting low income labor.

Charge everyone with market manipulation the same way that everyone who caused the 2008 recession was charged? Sincere question, because if they decide to charge individual investors who commented on a Reddit thread with market manipulation after my generation witnessed the downfall of the economy due to sheer lies and blatant manipulation by banks, with no major charges against anyone of importance, I, at least, will be very angry.

It's not bad to send thoughts and prayers! It is only considered hypocritical when someone offers those thoughts and prayers despite protecting/enshrining/supporting/etc. the thing which directly resulted in the tragedy. For example, strong supporters of gun rights and those who suffer from gun violence. I also extend my deepest sympathies to her family and those who she was close with. It is hard to lose someone, and I am sure it is even worse when a lot of people will be disgustingly cheering the death.

Maybe, but supermarkets also throw away a lot of food and restaurants are more consistent in their weekly ordering and usage than individuals. Also, at least in NYC, many of the restaurants donate their unused product. And individuals have to buy individually wrapped products using more packaging than restaurants. Does anyone know for if cooking from home creates less or more overall waste?

I am disappointed in myself that I believed this information without any evidence. I wanted to believe it because it confirmed and amplified my bias. I hope this gets more points than the first post.

He is an Amazon critic. He left the company due to issues with the company but also wants everyone to know that this is not an issue solely with Amazon. To be upset that you are called a critic of a company you criticized is strange. The reporters were writing a story on his criticism of Amazon - not on his views of society. And they included his statement that it is the entire industry to be clear of his opinion. I liked his essay and agree with it as an additional statement of clarifying in his own words, but I do not think the reporters have done anything wrong here.

My laptop has Killer WiFi. I know nothing about it. Why is that a questionable choice?

Protests almost never have a "consistent, clearly articulated goal," because of the nature of protests. People protest a problem and there are sometimes hundreds of proposed solutions. Unfortunately, certain biased media outlets choose the most extreme offered solutions and highlight them to discredit the entire movement and ignore the problem. And "shifting some city budgets around" is not as easy as it sounds.

There are a lot of comments questioning the political motives of publishing this research quickly. In medicine, if there is even a hint of increased risk of death, then studies are stopped. It happens a lot. In two weeks the journals published statements and corrections. Imagine if this same article was posted that said the drug was killing patients for two weeks, and the journals withheld the research because it was politically sensitive. This was a mistake, and human error and bias may have come into play, but it was a mistake that erred on the side of caution. Unfortunately, if the drug does prevent deaths, then it could also be just as bad an error. Hindsight is 20/20. I wish politics never entered this equation, and I blame the president for pushing politics into medicine during a pandemic. It was dangerous and these are the issues we are now facing.