hbartab

You might benefit from this overview: https://ianreppel.org/a-review-of-quantum-computing-courses/

the team was able to find low-cost solutions for power generation scheduling across a range of grid scenarios, including a model with 26 generators and a full day’s worth of hourly demand.

That does not seem like a massive problem where a quantum computer provides a clear advantage: 26 * 24 = 624 values to optimize over.

Too many dark triad personalities rise to be CEOs. Not surprising at all. Levels of psychopathy are the same in C-suites and prisons, which is about 5x higher than in the general population.

LLMs trained on comments of selfish people who compete for likes and cheap thrills rather than collaborate online appear to behave selfishly. Well, colour me surprised.

"To know and not to act is not to know" - Yukio Mishima from the Sea of Tranquillity tetralogy

Also seems like a really easy way to collect ideas à la Amazon to compete (with marketplace sellers)...

The former manager also believes there is an urgent need for alternative offers for digital payments "that are accepted and give citizens a more secure feeling".

Honest question: have there been actual European citizens who have security concerns about digital payments or is this just politicians yapping about sovereignty? It feels as if it deflects from the real reason but I am willing to plead ignorance here.

AIs can write code in seconds, but you may have years of regret _if_ you believe whatever it spits out without verification. The cold-war maxim "trust, but verify" is truer than ever.

The danger behind usage of LLMs is that managers do not see the diligent work needed to ensure whatever they come up with is correct. They just see a slab of text that is a mixture of reality and confabulation, though mostly the latter, and it looks reasonable enough, so they think it is magic.

Executives who peddle this nonsense don't realize that the proper usage requires a huge amount of patience and careful checking. Not glamorous work, as the author states, but absolutely essential to get good results. Without it, you are just trusting a bullshit artist with whatever that person comes up with.

Seeing as OpenAI & Co were trained on torrented books from similar places, I'm sure that ChatGPT provides an adequate search layer on top of Anna's Archive, though it is not as free from confabulations as one might hope for in a search engine.

Edit: grammar

So the indefinite retention would violate the GDPR? Sure, they can claim it's for legitimate purposes... yeah, right!

Reader mode in Safari can make it readable again, though I agree it's terrible on mobile.

A bank is more than an app. You are responsible for people's hard-earned cash, so there is, understandably, a lot of regulation and it differs from country to country.

Speaking as a customer of a bank that thinks it knows me but clearly doesn't, I would not bet on personalization. It sounds great in boardrooms but I would prefer it if my bank app just got out of my face and didn't try so hard to be a lifestyle brand I could not care less about. I also would not trust any automated investment algorithm made by some intern.

He'll have a fit when he goes down the list to read NEW Mexico.

Chomsky has been colossally wrong on universal grammar.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/evidence-rebuts-c...

But at least he admits that:

https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1269#

A Slackbot integration that rewrites on hitting Enter would be awesome.

That is such a terrible piece. StackOverflow was already in decline before ChatGPT was released. The authors cherry-picked their data to show charts to prove their point.

ChatGPT accelerated the decline ever so slightly but it was already dying: https://blog.pragmaticengineer.com/stack-overflow-is-almost-...

Typical for product management literature: story over substance.

Because engineers train the AI that'll replace them.

https://archive.ph/A15sW

Interesting article, though I disagree with the statement that many a government does not care:

At a time where the government's uncaring boot is pressing down on all of our necks, the best way to fight back is to care.

They care, just not about most people, animals, or the planet. They care to get richer and consolidate even more power.

Reader by Readwise: https://readwise.io/read

Software with CE and TÜV stickers... what a time to be alive!

It is the universal expectation that Linux will fall under the Cyber Resilience Act, even though it is not clear what Linux is exactly, nor who programs it and therefore who should comply with the act, which includes such fun things as mandatory third party audits by government certified companies.

If the EU cannot even figure out how to make it apply the proposal to the most common OS on servers, then it has no business proposing such regulation. All it'll achieve is hand incumbents (e.g. Red Hat and SuSE) more power in market dominance.

Both are diagrammatic but that's all the overlap there is.

Feynman diagrams are a way to compute Green's functions/propagators for particle scattering amplitudes. IOW they give a pictorial representation of things you need to compute to figure out particle reactions at high energies.

ZX calculus is for "simplifying" quantum circuits. I write this in quotes because the rules are pretty involved. Apart from Quantinuum, few (if any) are pushing for it. Almost no quantum computing papers are published using ZX notation.

Feynman diagrams in particle physics are, however, universal.

You might enjoy this write-up: https://pennylane.ai/qml/demos/tutorial_zx_calculus

You could ask: What can I do to better support you?

But it is possible they won't say anything because you are in a position of power and therefore they may not trust you with very personal details. It also put the onus on them to "educate" you on their condition, which makes people even more self-conscious.

An alternative is to offer options ahead of time. But make sure they can think about it before answering. Not everyone enjoys being put on the spot.

Read up on various types of neurodivergence and learn how to use each person's strengths best. Figure out what might trigger them and try to avoid such situations by providing your support. You can even use an LLM to role play.

Be careful: everyone is different, so don't overgeneralize from what an AI blurts out or what one person on your team does or prefers.

The most important thing is to be empathetic.

P.S. Managers with knowledge of (organizational) psychology are surprisingly rare. Most haven't a clue, and it shows.

It's what happens when the hype is at maximum. It's really a bubble that's going to pop one day. Remember blockchains a few years ago?

Just relax and realize it's mostly FOMO: https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/06/ibm_ai_investments/

Rather than relying on backroom deals or dynastic succession, the party's internal promotions and candidate selections are governed by an AI-driven merit evaluation system.

Because an AI cannot be gamed? Or because the company behind it does not have its own agenda? Thanks, but no thanks.

Most governments are already opaque enough in their decisions, adding a black-box AI is not going to anything to improve that. And it'll just hand power to those who are behind the AI. So instead of a government for the people by the people (through representation), you end up with a government run by corporations.

And at the very end:

Authors: Vysakh, ChatGPT(o3)

The 150-qubit Radiance machine was originally targeted for Q1, so it's going to be almost a year delayed.

A bit of a disappointment: it sports only 4.4k qubits when in 2021 they expected it to have 7k (and be released in 2024).

Source: https://www.dwavequantum.com/media/xvjpraig/clarity-roadmap_...

https://archive.is/YkoTw

https://archive.is/GlZjo

With students submitting ChatGPT-generated essays, the professors are merely responding in kind: if you don't care to learn anything save for passing the exam, why should I waste my time crafting lectures when I can generate them?