Mindey

Don't you see? He encoded the driving force of his motivation.

This is so applicable for "cat ears" wearables.

I wonder, do these signals also encode the ear direction, like eyeball muscles get.

And these days, with all the social networks, how is it that there wasn't a specialized space for getting to know people through co-working on something. It's either classroom or workplace, which had monopolized the most interesting thing about making relationships -- doing something exciting and potentially useful together!

Certainly, a great idea for hooking up with people for a task! ^__^

The system is written with FastAPI + NextJS, and hosted on MS Azure.

Whoever said there "internet," they fail to grasp how big the internet really is.

Is Intel poaching TSMC senior engineers in Arizona ( https://tinyurl.com/duvfkrm2 ) related? Cause, I would be really pissed off, if I we'd agreed to build a factory in foreign land out of desire to build good long-term relationships, and then, that country's strategically important corporation would decide take away our key engineers.

What's normalized in context of free opportunistic market can be seen as treacherous in context of politics and in the behaviors of strategically important enterprises of countries.

Then a hard drive without processing is very creative? False.

You get what you train for. Useless AIs are misaligned AIs.

Divest from misaligned AIs: 1) Avoid using them. 2) Invest into aligned AIs.

So, CEOs are thieves of the letter "E" from employees, if they delegate so much that the employees cannot meaningfully participate in the higher strategic decisions together?

Task delegation can be cooperative or abusive, as the article points out. It might be called theft if there is something owed and taken away from, but for that, it has to be that participation in executive decision was a right of employee or contractor to begin with (for that, they have to investigate under what agreement they work, what type of organization and expectations were set). Some contractors are happy to deliver a part or component to specifications, get paid and not participate in strategic decision making, others want to be part of the mission, and decide higher level goals together. It depends on the type of social contracts we enter into!

Btw., the "Executive Function Theft" as defined in the article, is an important social issue in the area of abuse of power, but reading plainly, it can be confused with good illegal leadership takeover without abuse of power, and with positive social outcomes.

Normalizing Unix seconds by the number of seconds in a day, results in Unix day, which has convenient properties, such as 5th digit after decimal point corresponding to decimal second (0.864 length of traditional second).

So, dividing UNIX_SECOND by 86400, we get a decimal Unix day.

For example, if UNIX_SECOND = 1688897360, then UNIX DAY = 19547.42315, Displaying this number with time formatting, makes it extremely easy for our time-trained eyes to interpret:

19,547 4:23:15, meaning:

19th Unix decimal year

547th day of the year (5-dmonth, 4-dweek, 7-dweekday)

4:23:15 decimal time (4-dhour, 23-dminute, 15-dsecond)

How about: a shorter second. 100,000 seconds in a 'day'. 1M seconds in a 'week'. and so on.

Yes, that's exactly what you get when dividing Unix secs by 86400 you get 100,000-second-long days, useful on Earth, for now. :)

What would be a non-celestial day?

Unix days make for a good decimal calendar. Simply divide Unix seconds by 86400, and you're done. While there are several decimal calendar attempts available online, this approach follows Occam's Razor principle by relying on basic division and digit grouping without the need for additional inventions, and yet, has pretty much all the benefits one would want.

Welcome to 21st century, where everything is almost done, and all you need is to know the language to specify what you want in the universal config.

Thanks for distilling the key aspects that Chinese biz-ops care about into 5 terms. In context of the post:

lunzi (轮子) (lit. "cogs"/wheels) => ("techs") [elements of tech stack]

huidu (灰度) (lit. (userbase) greyification) => rollout penetration

chendian (沉淀) (lit. precipitation) => know-hows

dapan (大盘) (lit. market, big dish) => analytics

maidian (埋点) (lit. probes) => trackers

# Clock analogy

To explain "tech" to non-techies, somebody comes along with a term "cogs" to explain their importance to a clockwork, which user only sees the dial ("frontend") of.

No "cogs" no clocks: no "techs" no products.

Additionally, Microsoft has for a long time been embraced by the world's governments as a solution to dealing with the official matters, most of the world's governments are users of it with access to the source code (Government Security Program (GSP)), and trust Microsoft to a high degree. Such trust may be important as a kind of justification for the world's governments that this AI is safe hands, however, obviously, every larger government is strategizing in their back-offices the implications of such AI to their security... and when AI becomes a strategic weapon, you bet it can't easily be open.

The idea of founding "OpenAI" was: Make AI an extension of human wills in the spirit of liberty, as broadly and evenly distributed as is possible safely. The idea was that if we empower people evenly, any evil people powered by AI would not be able to do a 51% attack on the people empowered by AIs collectively.

Now, suppose you "Open" the OpenAI, by giving the information about the model and data, all of that -- the only ones who would empower by that kind of openness -- is the very large corporations and the governments of powerful countries rather than people evenly.

So, while distributing the AI power evenly in the society ("democratize AI") was the original motivation of OpenAI group, and founding it as a non-profit may have motivated researchers and capable engineers join the effort, the reason why it isn't staying "open" is simply, because they had not yet figured out how to "Empower people evenly", rather than empower large governments and corporations through such openness.

What about no-chargebacks policy? A recouping transaction instead, like in blockchains.