MichaelZuo

Huh?

How does having their own place away from the “unwashed masses” relate to overturning the big platforms?

This would implicate close to 100% of American firms and most of the adult population?

If they are clearly misusing a system (SSN) never designed nor intended that way. And continue to do so even after being shown the facts.

So then why are so many, so eager and committed, to overturn the big platforms if “most people”… “have nothing interesting to say.”?

Maybe some decision makers do indeed have negative aspirations…

It would be very strange for Apple’s legal department to send out formal letters filled with claims on a lark.

You do realize that means the stuff you see is not that important right?

Or do you think literally every such piece of paper has identical importance and priority?

Because there’s no reason to automatically assume the USA stopped using the great seal on the most formal stuff?

That doesnt make sense as an example. Nearly everyone on HN would be aware of the great seal of the United States?

That all formal diplomatic letters are still sealed with to this very day, without exception.

Maybe it’s just a mental shock that HQ would demand that level of formality for more mundane things?

So… how do you plan on determining whether it went up or down?

This doesnt seem to make sense.

Since there is no current widespread agreement on the current “value” of the human mind, how could anyone in the future conclusively determine it went up, or down?

It seems literally impossible by definition regardless of what happens in the future.

This seems to imply a vast expansion of paperwork…?

The LAPD doesnt operate in some fantasy legal environment, but in the real world.

So revealed preferences of voters is that they just dont care that much about weeding out bad apples?

From what it sounds like, it’s likely not on any sizable group’s top 10 priority list in LA.

I know? I was the one who wrote that there could be hundreds on average, and dozens for a smaller subset.

That already implies a huge variation.

Edit: But it still doesn’t “bind” anyone in Brazil in the strict sense. At most, it goes from very loose to extremely loose.

Huh?

Did you not understand what it means for even the most humble adult to be getting away with dozens of offenses per annum?

It clearly is not binding on the “have-nots” either.

Of course there is selective enforcement of some % of laws on the books, that’s true in every country on Earth.

How can this be true?

Probably the entire adult population gets away with hundreds of offenses per annum on average (judging by the total amount on the books).

Even the most law abiding and most humble decile of Brazilian adults probably still get away with dozens of offenses per annum. That nobody cares to enforce at all.

In Brazil there are so many laws, I heard that nearly 100% of the population treats laws like strongly worded suggestions, at best.

Idk how the prosecution system even functions without credibility.

Isn’t it better?

Some people dont want to pay the extra overhead and cost burden of the manufacturer taking partial liablity. They’re willing to take a risk.

Don’t they need to sign something legally binding, the moment they adjust even one minor internal part?

Yeah it makes no sense at all to dismiss the test, when even the very best examples are noticeably below what a skilled teenager could produce.

Dead internet theory? Semi-random parroting by real people? Or something else.

Generally most people would consider a viable option to exist even if it’s multiple times the cost…

As long as it’s credibly offered without too many caveats.

This really makes no sense, as if half the words in the reply were garbled.

e.g. How is whether the training data from this or that jurisdiction “matter”, or not, even relevant to my comment?

I haven’t even thought of any specific “matter” enough threshold to evaluate that.

You need to re-read the comment chain. Nobody claimed so many nations would contend for frontier models.

I’m talking about training data, and so is the parent.

What?

There are over 190 nations in the UN. Even if we assume a chunk have no credible claim whatsoever, that’s still well over a hundred.

Does anyone know why such a fundamental gene would have such different behaviours between mammals?

In previous mouse studies, loss of NANOG disrupted both the epiblast and the yolk sac - a tissue that supports the developing embryo. In this human embryo study, loss of NANOG primarily affected the epiblast, the future body-forming line of cells.

This comment seems incoherent?

Even if the UN only has a very small amount of legitimacy and credibility… that’s still far far better than literally zero.

It is a bit strange why EU countries allow their own credibility and legitimacy get steadily dragged down, bit by bit, by all these thousands of dubious statements, tricks, manoeuvres, and so on.

Do they just not care about weakening their own societies?

Does PBH theory also predict >1 billion solar mass black holes so early?

Even if food quality remained exactly the same… By definition Americans would still be on average slightly less healthy, and so on… since the population grew so much? (and grew older)

There’s no magical low effort way to avoid regression to the global mean, as the population more than doubles in size.

That takes serious, coordinated, and sustained work across decades to avoid.

Yeah, there will always be some percentage of bozos and clowns in America… that’s never going to change.

And it’s unrealistic to expect them to stay perfectly motionless, they will try to adapt to the changing landscape too.

The further halving already includes literally everything under the sun, such as open rotor ultra-high bypass propfan designs.