f33d5173

Oh yeah right, underground data centers. What are you going to say next, data centers in space? Be real.

Rather than making everyone comply with the strictest noise and other restrictions of residential areas, it's much easier for everyone if you put industrial things in an industrial area and residences in a residential area.

The US nationalized tik tok so the chinese couldn't influence people anymore. Apparently that didn't work?

But if we can find something that doesn't do that, I'd prefer that.

There's nothing plausible that can do that, and he knew that, and was basically just saying "we're going to put ads on it" in a way that challenges you to explain what a better option would be.

Your AI has totally misunderstood what's going on here and is really contributing nothing to the discussion.

resignation

I appeciate short letters like this that get straight to the point...

The point is to embed a particular signature, which was generated randomly, in the image. The distance function discussed is the same as the popcount of the xor. It's well know that the xor of random data with correlated data is statistically random. Hence, however well correlated the signatures of unwatermarked images may be with each other, they would show no correlation with the signature of a watermarked image. That is, unless the watermark by extremely bad luck happened to be near one of these clusters the author discovered. This does represent a genuine flaw, but an extremely minor one, and one that can be easily mitigated with no changes to the underlying algorithm,

1. This is an american news organization

2. As you can see in the quote, the appeals are complete

It's a fairly trivial change. We already have timezones, which exist to deal with the fact that the sun comes up at different times in different parts of the world. We already have to design everything around the assumption that timezones can change, since people sometimes move to different parts of the world. All we do is cause, for an entire timezone, that it becomes a different timezone at one point in the year, and switches back later. This ensures that the sun continues to come up at a consistent time. The main issue it causes is to make the lives of programmers slightly more difficult, which I am sure they can cope with...

being charged as a terrorist oganization

Such charges are outright nonsense, for one thing. And I think that's relevant since it's the only possible jutification for the utter forfeiture of rights.

It's one of those irregular verbs. My demonstration, your freedom fighting, their act of terrorism

the accesskey attribute

Holy crow what a mess. No wonder I'd never heard of this.

They are ludicrously expensive for what they do. They have an apple logo on the box.

The real issue here is first that browsers don't expose a simple way to check for key combinations and second that developers don't bother building their own. You'll find on any number of sites that an intended key combination can also be invoked with additional modifiers of alt or shift or whatnot. Even here, the code shown only fixes the broader issue on windows; alt+cmd+s still gets blocked.

There should be a proposal for browsers to expose a property on the keydown/up/press event containing a code for the key combination. Something like "CTRL+S", "CTRL+ALT+S", etc. The programmer could then switch over this property rather than having to check key codes and modifiers manually.

I would also propose to any web developers that they build this property themselves in their own code and check against it instead of checking modifiers directly. Not only would it protect against bugs like in the OP, it would also be a lot more convenient to use.

The syntax is rather confusing. This is not an array of length 1, but rather a pointer which points to a memory segment which is at least 1 integer long. In other words, any array of any length (>=1) would be a valid argument to this function. "static" here means "don't do the normal thing where you totally ignore the length of an array argument to a function (which is, like usual, really just a pointer)". "static" was chosen because the keyword was available rather than because it was a particularly descriptive name.

  $ gcc -Wall -Werror -x c - << EOF
  void f(int x[static 1]){}int main(){f(0);}
  EOF
  <stdin>:1:37: error: null passed to a
      callee that requires a non-null argument
      [-Werror,-Wnonnull]
    1 | void f(int x[static 1]){}int main(){f(0);}
      |                                     ^ ~
  <stdin>:1:12: note: callee declares array
      parameter as static here
    1 | void f(int x[static 1]){}int main(){f(0);}
      |            ^~~~~~~~~~~
  1 error generated.

The point isn't whether it's genuinely plausible or not. If there is some law against something, there is some group of people who believe very strongly that this law should be followed and enforced. If the law is not actually followed or enforced, then the system as a whole does not agree with that small group. The point of this "plausible deniability" is to allow whichever regulator is concerned to give a pass to rule breaking without explictly doing so and hence angering this small group.

An issue with that approach is that a lot of humans violate traffic laws, so you have the danger that your self driving system learns to violate traffic laws.

Phrased another way, a benefit of that approach is that if the local conditions necessitate or advise breaking certain traffic rules, your system learns to do so while retaining plausible deniability that it isn't intentional.

It was a rhetorical question. Usually decisions in democracies require a 50% majority, as here.

Banning faangs from doing something also bans small companies from doing it, and regardless prevents the user from receiving it as a service. You shouldn't let anger at large companies excuse stupid regulations.

Corporations are you. Corporations provide a service to individuals, often in exchange for money. Restricting corporations from doing something is the same as restricting people from receiving that as a service.

What percentage of the vote was required to join the EU? The EU effectively constitutes a relinquishment of sovereignty, but that's not how it was sold to citizens, they were told that they could leave at any time.

3000 years of philosophy, but fortunately you're here to tell us "war exists, so nothing can ever be bad or good".

But your definition of processed foods has now shifted to being one of hyperpalitability and likelihood of overeating.

that's a very small shift. the two are very closely linked

why have this proxy at all

very simple reason: if i am in the supermarket i can tell immediately looking at a food how highly processed it is.

we have spent many decades telling people "just don't overeat" and it hasn't worked at all. we have also spent many decades telling people that "unhealthy" can be established by looking for a particular ingredient, say sugar, or fat, and it again hasn't helped.

the heart of the advice we would like to give people is that a healthy diet isn't one that has the exact right nutrient balance, but rather one that causes your body to naturally pick the amounts it needs. and we would like to communicate this advice in a way that makes it easy for people to make purchasing decisions.

"health" as quantity of nutrients doesn't really make sense. pretty much everything we eat is good in some quantities, and bad in others. so there's no nutrient that you can name that makes food unhealthy (there are some like trans fats i guess, but mostly). then what makes some food "healthy" and other food "unhealthy"? there is actually a simple answer to this question: foods which lead you to overeat them are unhealthy, foods which don't aren't. so then the relation between ultra processing and health become obvious. processing is expensive. the reason companies do so much of it is to get people to eat more of their food. food that has been ultra processed is pretty much guaranteed to cause over eating and hence be unhealthy. food that has not been processed usually will only lead you to eat a healthy amount. so "ultraprocessed" is pretty much the same as "unhealthy". furthermore, as above, defining "unhealthy" directly is tricky, because it doesn't directly map to the nutrient content of food. so a good proxy metric, like "ultraproccessed", is useful.

Ireland can claim that actually they'd rather it be gaelic. It has the perception of a colonizer language for them too.

CMS here not referring to content management system?

An index is an index. It works fine as an index if it excludes one or two stocks. People seem to forget as well that this is a question of waiting a single year before it including the stock. It is literally just long enough to make sure the price settles, it's not some catastrophic thing.

China is.

Usually in a first amendment sense legal consequences specifically. More generally we would probably require freedom from physical harm by non state actors, freedom from employment consequences, etc. All of these are consequences which freedom entails freedom from. That's what any freedom means.