saghm

FactorialPoint, your slideshows improve even faster than an exponential!

Reruns are already a real thing. Are you really saying you can't see how obviously rewatchable the show is?

Alignment is something you want, so if you're not confident that it's possible, that sure sounds like a problem

Recent history would indicate that this will not work out the way you're describing: https://www.propublica.org/article/maricopa-county-arizona-e...

Well I guess we can assume that this means it's not the reason senior leadership laid them off because senior leaders definitely never scapegoat their underlings or have too little competence to correctly assess why things failed!

The type of people who have been worked up about supposed voter fraud have rejected all existing evidence, so I don't know why you'd expect this go do any differently. Let's not forget that ICE has already admitted to lying directly to courts about the justification for their actions[1]; there's absolutely no reason to enable them in digging for more info. At absolute best, they're in a wild goose chase based on our speculation, but more plausibly they'll either lie about the results or try to use it for entirely unrelated purposes.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/26/ice-lawyers-...

Isn't this what alpha/beta/RC releases are for, ensuring that there are no issues before a general release? I just don't get ecosystem has decided to use client-side configurations for this rather than just marking the releases in the ways that already exist.

I feel like this could just as easily be accounted for as "are you paying rent to the person who owns it or not?", which rules out family members.

A key difference is illustrated in TFA. To maximize fraction of people owning a home, you dislike people renting or living with a homeowner. A spouse that marries a homeowner, for example. It would be "better" if they broke up and owned their own separate homes. Or perhaps they could buy two homes, one for each. Or they could by two homes and rent a third to actually live in - same metric value.

Or they could... both own the home? Independent of the rest of your argument, this is a pretty weird hypothetical case to illustrate your point. Joint property ownership is way more common than any of the "alternatives" you're suggesting, so it's hard to take what you're saying seriously when you've dismissed the obvious way that this would work for the overwhelming majority of married homeowners.

It's also a pretty dubious metric for wealth equality anyhow. If 100% of people owned their own home, then some fraction owning additional ones that no one lived in wouldn't really matter; the value of them would surely not be as high in a world where there was no renting or homelessness, and even if it was, I'd still take that over the alternative where every home is occupied by an owner but there's still not enough to go around for everyone.

That sounds a lot more like "yes, but..." than "no"

What you're saying make sense, but it doesn't help me understand the connection between people dying in WWI and the lack of recent textbooks. The two people the article describes as having the initial conversation were 30 and 28 years old (give or take a year each) in 1934, which is fairly young for a professor by modern standards, but this means they also presumably had been doing mathematics for around a decade each at this point. Did they not have any older colleagues at all who could have written textbooks? Why didn't they write textbooks in that time period when there would have been ones published in other languages outside of France? I'm not doubting the accuracy of the history being given here or in the Wikipedia article; like I said in my initial comment, I just don't think it's being explained very well, because there's still a gap for me between "lots of people died in the war" and "15 years later there are no textbooks".

I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding what you're suggesting, but my issue isn't that I want unlocking to be even more streamlined (since I'm fine with what I have and don't want fully auto unlock); it's just that I don't want the timeout that somehow started happening before it's even letting me manually unlock.

And yeah, I did try out various LLMs (including Claude) when it first started happening, but none of them were able to point me towards anything definitive about the cause, let alone the fix. In general I think it might be worth giving someone asking a question about something like this the benefit of the doubt about whether they've tried it, especially if you have outsized assumptions about how likely they are to solve problems. My experience is that when someone mentions having an issue, telling them "just ask Claude/Codex/etc." doesn't tend to end up being a very valuable contribution to discussions; people who are open to using LLMs for things will almost definitely have already done so, and people who haven't already are a lot more likely no to have done so for other reasons than the idea not having occurred to them. It's pretty hard to go more than even a few minutes into any sort of discussion about tech nowadays without someone bringing them up, so I think it's a pretty safe assumption that most people are well aware of them and considered them for whatever problem they're having.

To be clear, I'm not trying to berate you or anything but genuinely give feedback that might be helpful for you when trying to give advice on things like this in the future. Trying to give advice in a way that people will be receptive to can be difficult, especially when they're strangers on the internet, but I also think it's a a valuable way to spend time compared to a lot of other ways to spend time online, so I think it's worthwhile to invest time and effort into figuring out the best ways of doing it.

That would be an example of a non-torturted metaphor. When you copy the famous quote verbatim and then substitute both parts of it for things that are almost entirely unrelated, it becomes tortured.

I've been doing almost the same exact thing for a while, except on Arch and with a different EDID than my actual display drive my handheld that I stream to is 16:10 rather than 16:9 like my actual monitor. After a couple of months something changed (maybe a kernel update, although I never fully tracked it down) where the kernel no longer respects the parameter about which display to use for the initial LUKS decrypt and tries to use the fake display no matter that, which prevents me from unlocking it until after a timeout of a few minutes. I've made this somewhat less annoying by setting up unlocking via ssh on a local IP so that I can just initiate a reboot and then do other things around the house without having to wait around next to it until it times out and falls back to the real display, but it would be really nice to not need to wait in the times when I don't have any need to do anything else for a few minutes. Did you ever happen to run into this timeout issue, and if so, do you know how to fix it?

I've been running Sunshine on my Linux desktop for a while now and connecting to it with a SteamOS handheld and my laptop for mostly gaming for a while now. From what I can tell, the biggest difference with Sunshine and Moonshine when running on Linux is that Sunshine doesn't use a separate desktop instance per stream; by default, the streams will be mirrored to the clients, although there's a way to work around that somewhat by setting up a fake display output device with the boot parameters and a custom EDID with the specs you want (there's at least once repo where someone has a large set of them dumped from thousands of different monitor brands/models) and then setting up Sunshine to output when mirroring, which effectively means that only the remote client will actually have anything displayed.

It took a fair bit of iteration to get my setup to the point where it mostly works the way I like, but it's been pretty stable for months now. I game exclusively on my handheld streamed from my desktop, and on my local network the input lag is pretty consistently low enough that I don't notice any difference from when I had tried to play things locally on SteamOS, only I can easily max the graphics settings on most games I play (and on the rare ones that do struggle, there's often not a ton of downside to lowering the resolution a bit due to the handheld only being 1200p).

I don't understand what the point of keeping a browser closed-source is. Are they trying to monetize it or something?

My entire point is that there's absolutely no need to know if a "random IP connection" is a kid when there are so many mundane reasons to use the internet that aren't objectionable for the hypothetical child who the connection might have behind it. It's the equivalent of making anyone walking into a grocery store show their ID in case they happen to buy alcohol later. I don't drink alcohol either and have no need to buy it, and I'd be similarly incensed if I got carded every time I walked into a store to buy eggs or milk.

#1 is what's so crazy to me that people have trouble understanding. No one is saying that we're going back to the pre-LLM world; it's just that the world isn't honestly that different than before. Most people's lives are pretty much the same. Their power bills are higher, but that's not all that different from when gas starts costing more because of a new oil war. The government has some new ways to spy and target weapons, but that's pretty abstract to most people (and it's not like they were having trouble doing those things before). Some new tech companies pop up and have a bunch of money, and some existing ones have less, but nobody outside of the tech industry who isn't already a huge outlier in terms of how much they pay attention to stock prices really cares.

If this is the singularity, consider me extremely underwhelmed. My job my have changed, but to the rest of the world, it's just more of the same.

There are now two upstreams you can git fetch from; open your eyes, capitalism has gone too far!

Hopefully Nvidia doesn't try to bundle a bunch of slop to completely change faces of characters with AI into future framegen updates (claiming that it's in control of the developers but then not even checking with the devs of the game they put into the trailer for it) like they did last time...

https://www.techradar.com/computing/gpu/nvidias-ceo-goes-ful...

I feel like the Wikipedia article does not explain the backstory well:

Bourbaki was founded in response to the effects of the First World War which caused the death of a generation of French mathematicians; as a result, young university instructors were forced to use dated texts

Why would there not be textbooks after people died? Were they bringing the textbooks to the schools or something? Or were they saying that new textbooks weren't written because of the lack of French authors available? I hadn't thought that having textbooks maybe 15 years old would be a huge deal given the pace that math moves, but maybe that's only because the concepts for an undergraduate math course when I was in school were a lot further behind where the research is happening nowadays compared to back then.

I heard that the only reason WoW classic was even able to be a thing was that someone managed to find an old backup drive with the source code from back in the day. We take version control for granted now, but it seems like that was not how game development tended to operate a few a few decades ago.

My understanding is that the original source files of the game were not available, and that who even owned the IP wasn't entirely clear when she first started looking into the game. I don't have any direct citation for this so it's possible I've misunderstood things that I've cobbled together from following this for a few months.

One would expect that the consequences for committing illegal acts to make money should be somewhat obvious up front and part of the calculus for whether it "makes a lot of sense"

How do you propose they find out, without asking you to prove it?

How do I propose the government know if I have kids? I'm pretty sure they already know that I don't?

That's not what the comment I responded to was proposing:

Maybe even enable age restrictions by default, block replacing the OS or the firmware, and only allow it once the age was confirmed.

Having an extra hurdle before installing Linux would be an awful secondary effect for this type of regulation independent of whether the check itself is already objectionable (which I always obviously think it is, although obviously plenty of people also don't)

The comment I was responding to said this:

A sensible regulator would leave some responsibility to the parents, but require restrictions for consumer devices (smartphones, laptops). Maybe even enable age restrictions by default, block replacing the OS or the firmware, and only allow it once the age was confirmed.

If you think that this statement is too broad for this thread, I don't understand why you only have issue with my direct response to it. It seems like your issue is with the parent comment I replied to for not being on-topic enough.

I don't understand what's hard to understand. Regulation that affects people and devices that have no risk of being used for the purported thing that's supposed to be protected against is not well-scoped.

That's exactly my point; websites that already have absolutely no threat from having kids access them are literally unavailable due to the operating system put up a block that isn't necessary due to a hypothetical kid using the device to access an entirely different hypothetical website. The regulation is absurdly overbroad for what it's trying to actual protect against.