amwet

Ah, I thought we didn’t have strong evidence either way. Regardless, I shouldn’t have stated spacetime quanta so matter-of-factly. I just have an easier time conceptualizing if I treat everything like hypervoxels and that leaked in.

I think it’s easier to conceive of it like this: Each point in spacetime IS storage. Storage can be queried by interacting with it (in a variety of ways), though the process of querying affects the value not only of the querier, but also the queried, which may have side-effects as well. The interaction itself is the computation.

A simple example for the computation: It’s like placing boxes next to each other. Yes I could say 1 box + 3 boxes = 4 boxes, via explicit calculation. I could also simply place 1 box next to three boxes, and without having to explicitly calculate, by nature of the interaction, the result (4 boxes) has been produced

There is no background computation or storage. The universe IS computation and storage. Each spacetime quanta IS storage, and each interaction IS computation.

I have some experience with zkp, so I’ll try to answer your question to the best off my ability. First on the terminology, the “attester” in this case I assume is whoever is anchoring the data or issued the credential you’re trying to prove. For the canonical example, let’s say you’re trying to prove age >= n via a government ID.

1. The site does not know who you are. This is the whole point. You generate a mathematical proof you possess a valid government ID that says “age >= n”

2. Yes. You are generating a zkp based on information anchored by the attester. In this case the ID issuing gov. That attester can be something other than a gov, but zkps are a bit useless if the site doesn’t know what exactly is being proved. In this case you are proving “I possess a government ID saying age >=n”. You must know about the government to care about this proof.

3. Not in this case. The attester only knows it has issued you an ID, but does not need to be further consulted. You could certainly construct a scheme such that you require a ZKP of recent written permission from some entity, but this is not inherent to ZKPs.

4. This is a UX question. If the ZK wallet and website are implemented in such a way that it’s always displayed when a credential is requested and what credential that is, then yes.

Pretty sure the cover image is a Strokes album cover.

The obvious counter example is lotteries. People just like to gamble.

On mobile the this seems to just play static.

I think that was the joke

GitHub isn’t his employer, what are you talking about?

Voting adults can’t necessarily afford or arrange childcare which is a legitimate reason to bring their non-voting children. Effectively all non-voting children will one day be voting adults. Exposure to politics before participating in politics is valuable not only for them, but for everyone who will be eventually governed partially by their vote. Legitimate reason #2.

Regardless of the lack of vote, non-voting children are still governed by elected officials, giving them legitimate reason #3 to interact with politics, even if they can’t do so in the form of a vote yet.

You’ve picked a poorly thought out hill to die on.

“I want a new font so it’s easier to read” isn’t neutral?

> Standard space, word space, space per se, is the symbol typed using the widest key on the keyboard.

What a strange non-fact to include.

The tendency for LLMs to romanticize everything and speak like they’re in a novel will never not bother me.

In any case, this is cool that you built these tools, but I think it’s important to understand that this is technically not different than any other time you’ve used a cloud based LLM. LLMs are stateless, and every interaction feeds in the full context (or truncated summary) of your entire conversation. In that sense, your first prompt may go to data center A, and your second prompt may go to data center B, where A and B are many miles apart, and it’s no different than both prompts going to A. The LLM didn’t “teleport” from A to B, because LLMs are stateless and ephemeral. Anthropomorphizing LLMs is a bit disingenuous, because it’s not a stateful being.

Again, it’s cool you restored context automatically in a claude code session. In the web UIs for popular LLMs, you can typically see conversation history and resume across machines, it’s a shame this isn’t built into Claude code by default.

Do you mind elaborating? Obv GitHub isn’t the end-all be-all, but I think a lot of people (myself included) aren’t familiar with anywhere else open source is happening on a similar scale. Maybe 1 out of 100 project links I follow end up taking me to gitlab.