some_random

If the Chinese look like a beacon of hope you then you really should be looking closer.

Distillation is objectively easier than training a model from scratch, that's why all these Chinese labs are doing it.

A crackdown would probably be an FBI responsibility, the NSA is not a law enforcement agency and absolutely does not have the authority.

It has a pessimistic title and just like redditors most HN voters don't read the articles they vote on.

I think the author is just totally ignorant, there's a whole community of security companies and researchers who are scanning every single package as it's released and have been doing so for some time now. Some of the details like how long the cooldown should be for are certainly up in the air, but the numbers have reasoning behind them.

Any one of thousands of policy options that aren't "just ban it".

There are two issues with nanny statism, the first is poorly informed kneejerk overreactions, the second is immediately jumping to heavyhanded policies. In your example even the absurd warning label is significantly less of an issue than flat out banning non ECC RAM.

It's none of their business whether or not others choose to use ECC. It's absolutely his business whether or not authorities force them to use ECC RAM or else.

This is one of the most pro-china forums out there, what are you talking about

When you are used to thinking of citizens as children who need a nanny, all problems become bedtime shaped.

If you don't want the US to have your date of birth, photo, fingerprints, etc then don't go to the US. It's that easy.

I think it's a pattern that reinforces itself, as a nanny state develops it's opinion of it's people worsens and it's more willing to use force to compel them.

If you expect that level of incompetence from your elected officials than maybe the problem isn't the US.

It's to validate that the fingerprints of the person arriving are the same as the fingerprints of the person who got the passport.

It's just for people crossing the border, and yeah it's mostly fingerprints. The point is mainly to detect fraudulent passports, and the rest of the data is self explanatory (the US obviously is interested in people visiting that EU agencies have flagged for being potential terrorists).

What a stupid, hysterical claim. This "sensitive data" is just what's on your passport, fingerprints, criminal history, and terrorism flags (from European agencies), only for people crossing the border. I don't see how you could defend not sharing any of that.

Cool in principle, but I had an awful lot of trouble finding 7 letter words on the wordlist.

Every entertainment medium has some level of prestige associated with it mostly based on how old it is, which is the primary reason book reading is venerated. As for the democracy comment, I think the logic there smart people read books and smart people support democracy therefore the more people reading books the more democracy support there is. This is obviously nonsense but it's really popular especially among people who venerate book reading in the abstract like this.

In my experience this complete lack of reproducibility is what happens when you throw LLMs at a complicate problem without sufficient shaping, workflows, etc. Go ahead, let LLMs invoke LLMs invoke LLMs and by the end you'll get an output that's really well written but completely different run to run.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux,” and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use.

Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

So that's what I assumed too but it turns out that's not true, at least in Canada. The Flight Stop example was cited as an example of an artist asserting their moral rights to their art to prevent the owner from tying bows around the necks of a his flock of fiberglass geese for the holidays. For art in Canada, modifying it at all prejudices the author. The standard for other works is higher, but still nothing as high as you think.

https://www.aci-iac.ca/art-books/michael-snow/key-works/flig...

Edit: I also wonder how or if this works in reverse, if someone wrote a fantastic article on numerology or whatever with a screed halfway through, would removing it from the article violate their moral rights? I think any framework where the answer is no is also probably going to be unworkable.

If editing an article opens you up to copyright lawsuits for "destroying their work", it's completely untenable.

That's pretty crazy, seems like a ticking time bomb to me. I assume the precise meaning of "moral rights" varies by jurisdiction, but if from the integrity part of the Canadian definition started being broadly applied it would seriously change how things like moderation need to be done. I'm not a lawyer but I wouldn't be comfortable making any kind of modifications to text submitted by a Canadian contributor, even basic stuff like PII redaction. I find the Flight Stop example here pretty chilling https://www.aci-iac.ca/art-books/michael-snow/key-works/flig...

A "marketplace of ideas" wikipedia is not wikipedia, that's twitter or maybe reddit. More importantly, your theory of copyright being unwaivable without an employee-employer relationship makes the entire internet unworkable. Nothing could accept user input of any kind unless it can be ruled uncopyrightable.

It's funny you say that because you can absolutely value 13 black after it's been bet on. It's actually really easy, I would expect a middle schooler to be able to do so and intuitive understand the concept.

What a great excuse for stagnant wages.

I don't think it comes from the union, Wikimedia has always gone out of it's way to conflate the people who are creating, editing, and maintaining website Wikipedia and the leeches who captured that effort.

How is the right non-divestable if you can waive it? More importantly, how could wikipedia possibly work if contributors retained copyright in any form over their submitted articles and edits?

Have you ever read the ToS/ToU of any social media site? Did you know that by using this site you've agreed to arbitration? https://www.ycombinator.com/legal/#tou

Giving up copyright when you write an article for Wikipedia is literally the only way it could possibly work. The biggest issue Wikimedia has is its full time staff, followed by full time editors.

The Taliban absolutely did not terrorism the US out of Afghanistan haha