sidewndr46

isn't Ferrari the brand that requires any purchaser to be an existing owner? I could see NVIDIA going for something like that.

isn't parallel that tool that dumps some kind of begging message into your output each time you invoke it?

The part about sibling marriage is just so weird to read nowadays. When did humanity first figure out that inbreeding might be a bad idea?

I think I've seen the opposite end of this as well: I get the most value from any LLM when I ask it one very targeted question with a followup. I don't fall outside of any sort of context window sizing when I am doing that. That isn't to say that I don't have a few long engineering discussions that are helpful, but most are very to the point. It helps that I have decades of experience at this point and effectively know what to ask to narrow the scope quickly.

I guess for me, the question is how do you define each degree? If I say something like "Gemini, make the colors pop in my photos!" is that OK?

I hope they don't figure out virtually all housing is photographed with those weird lenses and the colors are enhanced digitally

I'm pretty sure if they stopped skirting the laws, it'd eliminate a decent cohort of their customer base. Watching someone come through a pedestrian area at 45 mph on a "bicycle" that clearly is an electric motorcycle is pretty interesting.

I'm seeing a business opportunity for a gambling site where it is extremely cheap to play, but the payout is always 0 dollars.

it had sleeping berths and a lounge I hear. As long as I can wear hearing protection, that sounds like a luxury travel experience.

This is one of the things I ran into early on. LLM needs to compute the determinant of a matrix? Sure, just spit out some huge hyper optimized implementation of it. Good luck maintaining that. Slapping "use industry standard open source libraries for common functions" has improved the quality of LLM output for me by such a large margin.

In most states you can go buy all the tannerite you want. That's an actual explosion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VaLtf_EIVQ

Given American policing culture, I really don't buy that the police can't show up and start arresting you for public endangerment. They may not want to, but that is different

I've seen studies like this before. They'll suggest that as little as 15 minutes of exercise significantly improves health in some group they studied. My initial assumption was they added 15 minutes of additional exercise. No, they studied people who did literally nothing. Then had them exercise 15 minutes a day.

As you might guess, their outcomes improved greatly.

I guess that is true, although you'd be hard pressed to prove that. I don't think any court would hear a complaint about a lower court or adjacent court having participated willingly in parallel construction.

Isn't Microsoft the same group that still won't allow you to write "import <cstdint>" in C++ ?

Didn't many states eliminate or raise those for large categories of violent crimes? This means that a rape today for example could be prosecuted decades from now

In terms of physical evidence? None.

Parallel construction means the judge doesn't know.

The individual who would prosecute them also needs to work with them to prosecute civilians. So pretty much, so long as it isn't murder.

The case was a shooting. It seemed remarkable they had neither a gun, spent cartridge cases, blood, flesh, wounds, or anything in the way of physical evidence.

I don't think that is ever admitted into the public record or presented to a jury. An expert reviews it and prevents the conclusions. In the even that you had the knowledge to review it yourself, you're excluded from the jury as jurors aren't allowed to question means and methods.

The judge doesn't care if the law was violated in collecting evidence.

I think you're missing the slippery slope that this goes down. The criminal charges were way too low, given the alleged actions. The state admitted it had absolutely no forensic evidence. The judge was perfectly fine with this and selecting a jury that was OK convicting in this circumstance. This pretty quickly pretty us down a path of "you're guilty of at least one crime since you've been indicted, maybe a more serious one if we have some evidence".

one of the more fun things I learned during criminal court in Texas is that the absence of forensic evidence cannot exonerate an individual. The prosecutor and the judge covered that despite not having any forensic evidence, the jury would still be expected to be able to convict the defendant. If you weren't OK with that you weren't eligible to serve on a jury.

I think what they mean is the A380 never made airbus any money. It makes plenty of money for many airlines

The Lockheed L-100 Hercules does exist and is apparently a civilian C-130

I find the whole thing a little odd. The 747 seems to be a great aircraft. It's also a quad jet and the change in regulations for ETOPS makes twinjets a no brainer for reducing cost. There's no reason to hurry and up and get rid of them, many will continue in cargo service for many years. But there isn't any reason to build big quad jets any longer

This seems like an odd version of the story. My understanding is Boeing designed lots of military aircraft, not all reached production. The 747 is the result of some of that design work.

That'd pretty much defeat the point of having local government. If politicians can't get their hand in the cookie jar, what's the point?

I'm reasonably certain when I ordered linux CDs in the 90s, no one put a limit on the time frame I could be using them