HN user
Offshore wind power costs ~3 times more per MWh than on land. You can still do it if you're really low on space, but if you have tons of empty space anyway, it may very well be cheaper to simply build longer power lines.
Yes. I have never seen any system (planes or elsewhere) that splits multiple voice communication inputs so you hear different streams in different ears. How would that be different (let alone better) than having both streams in both ears? It's not like your brain can process each ear separately.
I could probably find quite a lot of people who will tell you astrology is 80+% correct for them. Would you believe them or wait for an independent analysis? There are other AI "detector" systems out there that claim 99% accuracy. But independent research always found that they are actually garbage once used on real data. It's all in how you pick your tests. It's also funny to see how people on places like HN will easily dismiss stuff astrology, but fall for the exact same patterns when used in tech-y applications.
Airplane radios are generally broadcasting and receiving mono. There are modern headsets that can also play stereo, but only for onboard music or intercom purposes, if the plane supports it. But in planes with 2 radios you can usually configure their I/O individually. So you can listen (and also talk, although that makes sense less often) on two frequencies at the same time.
That's like saying whether or not you're going to fall in love this year is just one bit of information, so you might be able to read it from astrology. Yeah, sure, it might happen for some people with a certain star sign. But across the population there is zero reason to believe that there is a) any significant correlation and b) enough data variation in to even distinguish classes of humans.
There are things you can't do - even as a society - when the costs start ballooning beyond the GDP of smaller European nations. I mean, yes, in an emergency you could cancel all social security and public infrastructure spending and instead dump it into AI. But even then it will take several big nations to foot the bill if you want to still have a country left after you're done. With the level of political heckle everywhere, this is just not going to happen, because it would need unanimous support from all sides.
The IPO featured less than 5% of shares as free float. So the investors are still in pretty deep with their hands tied until lock-up restrictions expire. The IPO was more of a quick, public financing round for their AI branch than an exit for SpaceX VCs.
The Manhatten project cost about $40 billion in total adjusted for inflation. Anthropic's latest funding round alone raised $65 billion.
The entire Apollo project at the peak of the cold war cost about $300 billion in today's dollars. That's approximately what OpenAI and Anthropic have raised together in total until now.
I don't think governments can supply this amount of money for AI in the current political and economic climate. The LHC cost less than $10 billion by comparison and it was spread out over a much longer timeframe.
I guess you haven't used Codex/Copilot much? All good LLMs now use reasoning. Especially for code it is almost a requirement to produce correct results. But that means even having them implement a comparatively simple function or algorithm can easily produce 3000 output tokens. Waiting 5+ minutes every time you iterate because you want a tiny tweak in the code is not a practical strategy for live development.
If you don't want that you'll have to make your marketing emails opt-in instead of opt-out after signup is complete. If I have to disable a ton of auto-enabled marketing options on every page, you deserve to be listed as spammer.
Would you expect to be able to read a string theory research paper too just because the topic sounds interesting to you? And to be clear: You don't need a scientific background to read about sleep regularity and how it affects mortality. I'm sure there are more than enough popsci articles that will pick this up. You only need it if you want to understand the original research papers. Because unlike popular science magazines (which have journalists writing for laypeople), research papers are written by scientists for other scientists.
It's fast if you want to automate things that run independently or overnight. It's slow if you want to iterate code together with it.
So are most OTC drugs. Doesn't change the fact that you can get them everywhere. And long term nicotine use causes dependence similar to heroin.
Seriously addictive drugs being sold OTC
Nicotine is one of the most addictive substances in existence and it is sold everywhere. If governments actually cared about addiction risk, a whole lot of things would have to disappear from normal stores.
Do you often sign up for new services using your actual email? In gmail, I get spam in my primary mailbox maybe once every few months, usually after I've signed up for something. After marking mails as spam a few times, they are usually sent to the spambox automatically and I have a tidy primary inbox again for a long time.
Research papers are written to be read by other researchers, not laypeople. If you have no scientific background and want to read up on a topic that you are not familiar with, you'll have to find other sources of information.
I think you still misunderstood the question. Noone asked if there are relativistic effects with neighbors. In fact, it was said at the very beginning that they certainly have these relativistic effects too. The actual question is why are gold/thallium/cadmium etc. not liquid. There must be something apart from relativistic effects that explains why mercury turns into liquid at room temperature and these others don't.
That still doesn't answer why these relativistic effects don't cause neighbouring elements to be liquid. Electron velocities should be quite similar for them. There must be something apart from relativistic effects that makes mercury special in that regard.
I guess the more interesting question is why this doesn't happen for neighbouring elements in the periodic table?
That is more of a problem with the insane discovery system in the US than with anything else. If you had worked in Europe, GDPR would have protected your personal data from being sent over, as the Credit Suisse case has shown. They had to scrub all personal data before transferring files to a US counsel.
B1 to B2 is a big step. Bigger than A1-2 to B1. B1 is basically just understanding people who speak slowly and clearly and being able to participate in everyday life situations. So a very gradual progression. B2 is already being able to do professional work in that language. This is what will take considerable time and active study. But it is also not a requirement for naturalisation in most countries. And many natural born citizens also never reach C1-2 level of proficiency either. So if you're B2, you may as well be counted as fully integrated.
GDPR guarantees a right to privacy even on work devices. I think you need to filter out personal messages if compliance requires logging.
I've lived in foreign places for less than 6 months and still bothered to pick up enough language to at least converse on a basic A1 level. Especially in certain regions where people don't speak english well this is almost a requirement for any daily life that is not work related. I can't imagine living somewhere for six whole years without picking up the language at all. Maybe if you actually hate the place and are sure you will leave again after that stint, but the above commenter doesn't seem to fall into this category either.
But it does cover the state described in the top comment. A<-B is never going to be easily retrieved if you only experienced A->B during training, regardless if you are a human neural network or an artificial one. Also, you need to define "spatial" better. This is about logic after all and not geometry. Or topology? It's unclear which context you refer to. It's certainly not the topic of this thread.
It certainly holds true for humans. The brain stores relational information in a sequential pattern that is not automatically reversible. One of the best examples is the alphabet. Everyone learns it in school, so the pattern A->B->C->... is trivial to recite for most people. Now, if I gave you a random letter to start with and asked you to to recite the remaining letters until Z, you'll probably find it is still pretty easy. But if I asked you to cite the letters backwards to A, most people would suddenly struggle with this task because they never learned or used the alphabet that way in school. You need to train specifically to link this kind of information backwards in your brain.
If you look at public benchmarks like ExploitBench [1], then you'll see this is mostly a question of token budget. Once you give it sufficient tokens to burn, GPT 5.5 is roughly as good as Mythos when it comes to finding bugs and building exploits. With some clever auto-prompting to clear stalls, it even beats the base Mythos version. So Mythos' "magic" is not in the model, but in the harness and compute env. That's probably also why they never released it, because Anthropic already struggled heavily to make Opus available to the general public. Releasing Mythos publicly may well be technically impossible for them due to compute constraints.
Youtube channels are also getting hyper-monetized now. Private equity firms finally learned that some of these informational channels draw a huge crowd of loyal viewers with a very specific kind of technical interest and have built high levels of trustworthiness. Ideal targets for running ads. Now they buy all these channels and have their marketers optimize every corner for generating easy money.
Maybe project managers will finally get to experience flow states?
This is not some fundamental problem. There are amazing options that don't suffer this downside. Most people are just too lazy and want something that works out of the box, so they accept or ignore the inherent risks of tools like Claude Code or Codex. But you just have to invest a little bit of research into what you need and which open model and harness suits your requirements. Then you can have your cake and eat it too. Long term this will be the standard anyways, it's only difficult while the frontier is moving so fast and aimed at ridiculous IPOs.
Also should note that this is a working paper and not peer reviewed. Working papers are circulated to invite comments and discussion. Until some experts confirm their methodology I wouldn't take any of this for granted.