11,987 karma · joined June 10, 2010
In the current single vendor model. An intermediary could accept the samples, blind identities, then provide a "one time" mechanism for retrieving results.
Bill Burr's take was pretty good. "What.. I'm going to spit in a tube and mail it into the internet?"
Yep. Sure; but, what happens when it becomes overloaded?
> Homa manages congestion from the receiver, not the sender. [...] but the remaining scheduled packets may only be sent in response to grants from the receiver
I hypothesize it will not be a great day when you do become "systemically" overloaded.
Oh. I broke my arm 5 years ago. I use everything "wrong" now. I have no other choice.
I've come to absolutely hate products and designers that can't grok this basic fact of life.
Including patents owned by MIT, no? It feels like this could use a disclosure and some additional context to understand where the incentives here are. I've walked away feeling like I know less after having read this.
I believe you're referencing "budget resolutions" which are not law and have a more complicated relationship to the process.
I would call it intentionally ignorant. Please try googling for "best book for learning polish" then flip to the image search. Which one is actually the best? Can you tell from here?
> It is not hard to find proverbs that assert falsehoods.
Yet it is easy to find organizations with terrible logos that still do good work.
The key thing here is the "Due Care Clause." The administration is required to implement our laws with "due care." If there's a law on the books the administration is required to enforce it. The means and expected effectiveness of that enforcement are often not specified.
Computing is a series of "minefields." At least you get a map of this particular one.
I'm far more confronted by public facing APIs that involve user authentication than I am of any particular documented set of language facts.
Literally judging an entire book by it's cover.
This is the DoD. There is absolutely guidance and rules already in place for creating, developing and approving new insignia. It's highly likely the people involved in the program had the least to do with it, and it's terribly unreasonable to judge the entire group by it.
I don't think it has anything to do with "identification." It has to do with interest. If your groups are centered around identity then that will be prioritized over content.
Content needs little moderation. Identity needs constant moderation.
If you're going to rely on this dynamic, then you're going to have this consideration.
Now if they could just get audio levels and compression figured out.
Those are multicast feeds.
> Trying to push a live IP stream directly from the remote live venue rarely works as expected.
In my experience it almost always works as expected. We have highly specialized codecs and equipment for this. The stream is actively managed with feedback from the receiver so parameters can be adjusted for best performance on the fly. Redundant connections and multiple backhauls are all handled automatically.
> That's precisely why the broadcasters/networks do not do it that way
We use fixed point links and satellite where possible because we own the whole pipe. It's less coordination and effort to setup and you can hit venues and remotes where fixed infrastructure is difficult or impossible to install.
All without addressing the underlying problem that made people afraid of Tom in the first place?
> with excellent outcomes.
Apparently excellent short term outcomes. The real question is does this actually solve the long term problem and is it possible that the strategies used to create this outcome actually aggravate long term outcomes?
It could also be explained as the researches accidentally recreating "Clever Hans."
And how you are disadvantaged by two robot vacuum cleaner manufacturers not merging? Would you feel differently if you worked for one of them?
You've cherry picked two examples. This is mud slinging and not genuine analysis.
Which states "As of April 2021, of the total fifty U.S. states, approximately thirty have an age of consent of 16 (with this being the most common age of consent in the country), a handful set the age of consent at 17, and in about eleven states the age is 18."
Which clearly seems like a majority to me.
I think you're confusing "Unrestricted" with "Restricted by Authority." You'll note that the "Restricted by Authority" age is often younger than the "Unrestricted" age. Which accounts for our different tallies. [1]
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_in_North_Americ...
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_in_the_United_S...
What about other products that contain no milk? Shouldn't they do this as well? Should every package list what it doesn't have?
> that one standard line of text
This is the point. The packaging is entirely up to the manufacturer. Should the FDA approve every food package before it's used? We obviously can't do that. What we can do is mandate a few "standard lines of text." So that regardless of the packaging decisions consumers can still determine the facts quickly and _reliably_.
Think of people with allergies that have low vision or any other handicap which would make all these "good enough" ideas become dangerous.
It's a recall. You want to avoid any further confusion. You go with the simplest instructions possible. Just because they recommend you throw it away doesn't mean you actually _have_ to.
> "return it because it was not clear this was a dairy based butter"
What value does returned butter have? It's not something we can refurbish. It would be ultimately be thrown away anyways.
The data is really easy to get. I wish more people would avail themselves of it.
I think you've just made that up; however, I am willing to stipulate that 99.9% of Hacker News posters will never tow anything. I always forget how out of touch the audience here is.
You don't do much towing, do you?
"Ludicrous mode."
> the top killer of drivers are trees on the side of the road.
It's actually alcohol and drugs. Which is the reason those drivers find themselves in the trees.
Aside from that misuse and intentional misunderstanding of the FARS statistics is readily used by Tesla as a justification for their FSD system.
In this scope, my mental model is that LLMs would be good at modern style long form chess, but would likely be easy to trip up with certain types of move combinations that most humans would not normally use. My prediction is that once found they would be comically susceptible to these patterns.
Clearly, we have no real basis for saying it is "good" or "bad" at chess, and even using chess performance as an measurement sample is a highly biased decision, likely born out of marketing rather than principle.