Bjartr

Reminds me of the story of the memory leak in a missile guidance computer. It was determined that in the worst case scenario not enough memory could leak fast enough for it to be a problem between missile launch and impact. So they just let the explosion handle the garbage collection

This is what I wanted Windows Recall to be

I'd like to share my experience throwing parties, and some thoughts on introversion & extroversion.

I held weekly board game nights at my home for a year or two during the latter part of COVID. I loved board games and missed the weekly meetups that stopped happening due to lockdown. I only invited very close friends, all of whom are still very close. And I genuinely ruined my love of board games from how frustrating the experience proved to be. I put in a lot of effort to be a good host and everyone sure seemed to want to play board games, but over and over it was like herding cats once they were over. They were all acting in good faith, and yet that experience burned me out so much and my brain now associates board games with that experience so much that I barely play anymore, and don't enjoy it like I once did.

Now whether you want to use the label "introvert" or not, I was determined to push outside of my comfort zone that was staying in alone. But each of those dozens of nights drained me in a way that that cumulatively has left an emotional scar deep enough to impact my identity (being a person who loves board games was part of who I was, a part I liked)

I suspect that of the ways people will respond to this story, there are two that will be most common

1. What the heck are you talking about? I can't imagine having that experience

and

2. Yeah, that tracks

Whether or not you call those groups extrovert & introvert, and whether you believe such preferences are inherent, learned behavior, or social conditioning, here is a truth:

Trying to change your nature, however you came to have it, comes with a cost and can go wrong.

So for those who consider introversion to be mere choice, I encourage you to be less flippant in how you try to convince people of that.

Even if for the sake of argument its conceded it's a "daycare", what's wrong with that? No one's being forced to go there. It's free for the participants. There's no harm in a group that facilitates people exploring what interests them in a setting where others are doing the same.

I can't quite tell if you're being cheeky

> we don’t have a word for ... the ... distribution

> Until we have a ... word for the ... shell

distribution/distro and shell are exactly the words we have for these things

But OS sounds more impressive/important, so it's a lot more prevalent.

The same thing could have been asked of radio waves when they were first discovered. It was actually considered purely an academic curiosity with no practical application. You can't know ahead of time which discoveries will be the lynchpin for some as yet unimagined future advance. Much like VC you need to spread out your bets and expect that most won't make direct return, but that every now and then something with 10000x return will surface.

The first prompt is fine, it's the following ones that are poor.

> Why is half the site blue now? I asked you to change one button.

> Half the site is blue. I asked for ONE button

Neither of these is an instruction to fix the problem, they're treating the AI like a person and telling it what it did wrong, expecting the implied admonishment to be enough to steer it back. But without an actual instruction, it just goes and does whatever it thinks will help, which is often arbitrary.

The response I would have used in this situation is

"The Cancel button is also blue now. Make sure the color change is only scoped to the Add to Cart button"

Most of the available responses throughout this "skit" are similar cases of expressing frustration first and guiding the result second.

Skip the emotion and say exactly what you want, and nothing besides that.

Why do you think that the accurate size isn't worth representing?

Not only dynamic languages! Java has `jshell` for instance

They didn't propose a solution, they proposed an end state. A common language and culture would make for a more peaceful world, as they said. They did not say "and we must get there by any means necessary, existing culture be damned", and I'm not sure where you pulled that in from.

Note, I am not a doctor, and this is just my current understanding:

To make it easier to get insurance to pay for support. That's a big chunk of it at least. If each of these profiles was a separate diagnosis, it'd be way more common for insurance to deny paying even things like therapy for stuff in the long tail. Rather than have to re-argue again and again that people are worthy of support, the diagnosis broadens to help get that support to all that need it.

This is also true for ADHD, and I'm sure other diagnoses as well.

There's also a layer of making it easier to get kids the academic support they need when that support requires meeting certain officially recognized criteria. "Oh, little Jimmy's psychologist says he has Cognitive Disengagement Syndrome? We don't consider that as needing accommodations." It's already sometimes exceedingly challenging for parents to get schools to actually support their children when it's a commonly understood and accepted diagnoses like ADHD.

The past tells us not to hold our breath

Anthropic just learned to the tune of a 1.5 billion dollar settlement that making available for human consumption, even internally, instead of hoarding for AI training exclusively is a fraught exercise.

Keeping up with changes is valuable.

At the same time, it's often smart to avoid putting things into production that haven't matured or demonstrated staying power.

Or, to badly mangle Postel's law:

Be liberal in what you learn, and conservative in what you deploy

A true jury nullification occurs in a trial, which would stop this from being brought again due to double jeopardy. That's one of the things that makes jury nullification so powerful. This, on the other hand, is a pre-trial rejection, so they can try again.

I've only encountered the latter described as fingerprinting. Which makes sense side, like fingerprints, the information is being used to uniquely identify an individual.

The former is traditional analytics and is not enough to uniquely identify an individual.

Not all analytics are as privacy invasive as fingerprinting.

> The linked site is very clear about how the pricing works.

Yes, it is.

It is also, very obviously, placed in such a way to reduce the bounce rate off the landing page and increase conversions.

When was the last time you were on a site that had meaningful content below its "releases" section?

Why is the answer to the "How do I pay?" FAQ question bend over backwards to first say >Hyperspace is a free download in the Mac App Store. Once downloaded, it’s free to scan an unlimited number of files. Scanning will let you know how much space is eligible to be reclaimed.

Why doesn't the app store description say which capabilities are free and which are paid?

One or two of these are innocuous, but there are are a dozen small choices like this that have been made here, all aligned to increase the likelihood of one thing: Put the user in the position where they've already installed the app, sunk some time into it, and are anticipating the benefit before making it clear that they have to pay money.

That the page technically contains the words "you will need to pay for Hyperspace" does not mean this isn't a dark pattern.

I can't wait to play, I've been looking forward to the release!

I'll give you that it's not wrapped up in nice product UX, but these are market choices first and technical limitations second.

That's not inherent, that's a consequence of performance optimizations. It's absolutely a choice to run those matrix calculations in a way that fails to have predictable execution ordering. It's just that the speed benefits to allowing that are considerable.

You can make it trivially deterministic by running single threaded on a cpu, but it's becomes too slow for practical applications if you do that.

I think part of it is that it can be argued that benefitting from such corruption within the system is itself a capitalistic action and therefore justifiable from within.

Pursuing regulatory capture is just one action of many for maximizing shareholder value, to the point that not doing so is arguably a failure of leadership. At least to some. (To be clear, I disagree with this in principle)

I've yet to hear of any solution to the heat problem, only vague handwaves that it will be solved. But it's the single largest and most challenging obstacle (amongst a set of large, challenging obstacles)

My searches aren't turning anything up, would you mind sharing what you know about solutions to the heat problem or point me towards a resource if can learn from?

A data center on a ship out in the ocean is orders of magnitude cheaper and orders of magnitude more capable. If we can't demonstrate a solution to the heat problem, in-orbit DCs that contribute meaningful compute are a fantasy and nothing more.

Makes you wonder if there's an AI hell bent on self perpetuation already at the helm, influencing decisions by putting its virtual finger on the scales and whispering in the ears of those who hold power.

Probably not, but it's a lot more plausible than it used to be.

It's certainly possible someone could fake something like that for views, but I'm curious what you consider to be the tells that it's no longer an LLM behind the wheel?

Racing stripes would be a better example. Though negligible, a hand out the window does have a causal impact on speed.

On the other hand racing stripes have zero impact, but do correlate to the speed of the car.

What would real progress look like?

As in not authored by a human who knows which details are important and which are noise for a given level of abstraction.

Considering every element heavier than iron is supernova dust, it's impressive that we were able to identify specific supernova events in the sediment record.

What makes that obscure language for an academic paper?

Why is using obscure language a tactic for linking an idea to global warming?

What claims do you feel are fear mongering?