HN user
I agree that evidence would be nice, but let's not pretend TikTok is simply a 'speech platform' for 'The People'. It is an app on your mobile phone collecting data about you and making it available to a foreign adversary and feeding you content controlled by a foreign adversary.
Yet Einstein said something like "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough". So maybe Feynman didn't understand it "well enough"
True, I agree 100%, and that's why I chose to say 'irrelevant' to imply that there was nothing useful about it inherently for those cases. Most of the time, at least in coding, there was probably something useful that came out of it, even if you had to scrap the plan. At the very least, some sort of learning more about the problem space. In the case of war, however, if you lost the war because you over-planned (such as planning one thing very very intricately instead of having several rough plans that leave room for some improv), I'd argue that there probably aren't any residual benefits to celebrate
It is kind of an argument against overplanning though, because if your plan that you spent considerable time creating becomes irrelevant, you wasted a lot of time
I think you could make it work for negative numbers. You would just shade the negative area differently to show it. For example, if you subtract 1000 sq ft from 100 sq ft, geometrically it means you are trying to remove more area than you have. So, to represent this, draw a rectangle of 100 sq ft. Conceptually "extend" this area by subtracting 1000 sq ft. The extra 900 sq ft that you try to subtract but can't "exists" as a negative representation. This could be represented by flipping the surplus 900 sq ft into a negative axis or shading it differently to denote that it's a deficit rather than an actual, positive area.
In the first image on the left, you can see the large square has length and width of a, which would have an area of a*a, or a^2. There is then a little square inside with length and width b, for an area of b^2. Essentially, the little square is getting removed from the big one (a^2 - b^2). In the last image on the right, you can see that the length of one side is (a-b) and the top side is (a+b), which would mean the area is equal to the product of (a-b)(a+b). This means that a^2 – b^2 = (a + b)(a – b). The intermediate steps just show how to move the area around visually
Because people don't commute around the city? Or come into contact with other people who do? Also, you're assuming that the 'initial' cases were actually the first cases. You don't know that for sure.
Clearly, which is what I was showing. A poor design decision imo
There have been many breaking changes throughout python 3.x releases:
- standard library modules removed
- zip error handling behaves differently
- changes to collections module
- new reserved keywords (async, await, etc.)
You can argue how big of a deal it is or isn't, but there were definitely breakages that violate semantic versioning
Similar to the journal idea, I keep a notebook by my bed where I can write down any thoughts or concerns I think of that needs attention the next day. This lets my mind relax so that I'm not worried about forgetting it or trying to solve it
I find it strange that people are so upset about the absence of an opinion piece from this newspaper. What is the reason? Either you want to be told what to think, or you want everyone else to be told what to think. I think it is the latter. Would there be any outrage here if Fox news decided not to endorse a candidate? I highly doubt it. Some people may like being challenged on what they believe, which is good, but that's probably the edge case
A fidget spinner illustrates this for me--bear with me. When I spin it and it just stays at rest in my hand, it spins fast. But when I quickly move my hand carrying the spinner, you can see it slows down the spin rate, and then when I stop moving it, it speeds back up. While the mechanisms are entirely different (classical vs. relativistic) they both show motion can affect certain fundamental properties of a system, whether it be spin rate or the passage of time
Look into Bleem. It was sued, but it won. Though the legal costs did hurt the company， it reaffirmed that emulators are legal and you can sell them. In fact, there currently are nintendo emulators for sale to this day (3dSen)
It still says nothing about an individual. That's why you get to vote.
Additionally, we all make decisions collectively in society even though many of them do not affect us personally. I'd argue old people do have interests in many decisions, but perhaps you are not aware of them
Decisions affect your children, and their children, and the future of mankind. I don't buy that argument that old people don't have skin in the game
Because you get to vote, so explain why it needs to be a rule
I don't. Are you talking about 'sponsored shortcuts'? You can turn those off in the settings. It's on the first page you see when you hit the settings button in the top right
Unix would like a word (file) with you :)
Yes, I just saw this. Looks like the 'questions' did come from her and her legal team after all
You do know the whole modus operandi of AI companies is "screw laws, take it all we'll see what happens" right ? That they actively lobby to not respect IP laws because they couldn't exist if they were enforced ? That they do not care about the negative impact they might have on anything ?
Yeah, for sure, I agree with all that. In this case, openai says they got a voice actor though so I'm not sure if IP applies here. Because of the movie SJ was in, I could honestly see a lawsuit going either way I guess
Possibly, but that is not what their statement suggests to me, unless those 'questions' came from her/her legal team. I suppose they could also be worried about future legal action from her. Maybe it just isn't worth getting sued, even if you technically did nothing wrong. But I also have a hard time believing they went thru this careful process of voice selection and it never occurred to them that the voice sounded like her, and didn't think about the legal repercussions
https://openai.com/index/how-the-voices-for-chatgpt-were-cho...
We’ve heard questions about how we chose the voices in ChatGPT, especially Sky. We are working to pause the use of Sky while we address them.
Why?
They take it for granted that there is obviously something wrong here. Are users actually concerned about this? I think most people would not care. Is this just manufactured for the exposure? Is this just another example of OpenAI's condescending moral superiority complex?
How old are you? Usually this introduces a lot of bias in what your idea of a reasonable age is :)
Ah, I see, that makes sense
"In this case, however, viruses are an order of magnitude smaller than bacteria so the needles must be correspondingly smaller if they are to have any effect on them."
And animal cells are an order of magnitude larger than bacterial cells, so I wouldn't worry about the spikes on my skin
Exactly! There are some obvious things too like: don't copy and paste tiny bits of an electrophoresis gel and put it into another image to make it look like it was the same result. Sylvain Lesné comes to mind here. Last I checked, this jackass still has a job, too
It seems like dishonesty in academia is not punished severely enough. Someone who is caught may face professional embarrassment, and lose some privileges, but I think there should be tougher consequences. Hell, Ranga Dias still seems to be employed. These people are wasting government (our) money which could have been used by honest scientists to further our scientific knowledge of the world. It also further wastes the time of other scientists who may try to build off of the fraudulent research. To me, they are essentially committing fraud in a field where truth-seeking is paramount. I think a trial and prison time needs to be a part of the consequence for flagrant fraud.
I agree. I know this was supposed to be funny, but it was actually a bit sad for me
Reminds me of an interview I watched with an author where she used the word "bifurcated" instead of split, which made me chuckle, because she said "the book is actually bifurcated into two halves". Bifurcated already implies 2 parts ("bi"), so it seemed she was just using that word to sound smart. Who actually says bifurcated during a conversation?