Honestly, I had the impression that the current US regime also supports Russia in its current war. Did they not ask Ukraine to give the already occupied land and then some? As far as I remember, that was in a form almost like an ultimatum, too.
China might be a bigger threat, but I find it hard to believe that this would be the reason.
Obviously, taking a photo requires much more than clicking a button. Even if you simply pointed and shot, the timing can be special. Copyright requires some creativity, if the creation process is completely mechanical you may not be able to copyright the end result.
I really wish that people would distinguish between "Americans" and "the US government" (and between the latter and the Trump regime) more clearly. I am Turkish and when I am associated with the behaviour of the Turkish government (which happens when I am abroad), it is very unpleasant. I lived in the States for 7 years and have many friends there. I am guessing they would similarly find this association unpleasant.
I disagree, but maybe only because we are using different definitions.
For example, we have neutrino oscillations, this requires neutrino mass, which is not part of the standard model of particle physics. In cosmology, there is "lithium problem" (amongst others), which cannot be explained by Lambda-CDM.
We know our physical theories are incomplete not only because our mathematical frameworks (GR & QFT) are incompatible (similar to the incompatibility of Maxwell's equations and the Galilean transformations that form the basis of Newtonian mechanics), but also there are these unexplained phenomena, much like the blackbody radiation at the turn of previous century.
No, I am simply stating what is expected of a good scientific theory in physics. Such a theory should have power to explain things as well as make new, testable predictions. It is valuable to collect our present information under one umbrella, but if everything falls under that umbrella, it may as well not exist. String theory does not have predictive power (mostly because of energy scales mentioned elsewhere in this discussion, unless someone comes up with an ingenious way to probe its domain with low energy experiments), and its explanatory power is not very useful since it explains both reality and things out of reality, indiscriminately.
Everyone is free to pursue what they want. I did not comment on that at all. You click on whatever part of the tech tree you want. However, my expectation is that the string theory does not have the qualities of a scientific theory that improves one's knowledge about universe.
To make this valuable, it should produce a limited set including standard model. If you produce pretty much everything one can dream of, that does not carry predictive power.
What does string theory predict that (1) is within experimental reach in, say, 5 years (2) if not found, would prove it wrong. Was there ever anything satisfying these two simultaneously? AFAIK,the answer is "no".
I first thought this is nonsense, but then it made a lot sense. It might be an exception to the rule "never attribute to malice, that which can be explained by stupidity."
I understand where you are coming from, but I hope you realize this is very subjective. The things you mentioned and other elements of the fantasy genre do not become irrelevant for many people through their life, well into adult life as well. In fact, they may become irrelevant and become relevant again.
Just to make it clear (and perhaps to state the obvious), you are not believing in these when you play these games or read these books, you are voluntarily suspending disbelief.
Umm, but didn't you already "casually violate a social convention" and perhaps a law or local ordinance when your green led shined through your neighbour's kitchen window? Then perhaps you should not complain, since you forfeited the benefit of civility by your own terms.
This reminds me of the "illegal opcodes" in Commodore 64. I believe they were even present in their entirety in Commodore 128's (which uses 8502, not 6502 as its main CPU) C64 emulation mode. If someone knows how or why they remained part of 6502's instruction set over C64's lifetime, I really would like to know. I suspect, it was deliberate since "customers relied on them".
No. There are hundreds of programs that easily read and create PDFs. OTOH, reading .docx is a pain. Far be it from me to defend Adobe, but PDF is nothing like MS Office formats.
His reaction seems entirely appropriate. He could ignore you, but then you might keep replying to his posts and potentially spread incorrect but damaging information. He is losing close to zero by blocking you, but preventing a potential big loss. Why did you make that remark, if not to damage YC's reputation? This does not seem like the correct approach, if you wanted to improve their selection process.
I think what would be useful for such a site is a README or HOWTO that shows step-by-step how to make an app like this. It does not have to be complete, or even nearly complete, the description for the unique parts would suffice. For example, for this site SVG format does not have to be described a reference or two would do.
That being said, this is a neat idea. I like it! I'd like it more if I had pointers on how to modify or extend it.
It is the other way around. The military is being deployed on Americans. Whether they are rioters or not doesn't matter for establishing an authoritarian state.
"If you’re making requests on a ChatGPT page and then pasting the resulting (broken) code into your editor, you’re not doing what the AI boosters are doing. No wonder you’re talking past each other."
This is in fact what I am doing (though I am not trying to convince anyone not to use LLMs). How can I get into this other mode? Any pointers? Do I need to pay up for a service? I do not want to carry out vibe coding, I want to use LLMs to solve physics, math and logic problems/puzzles. I'd appreciate any recommendations.
Hamming gave that talk many many times. There are recordings of it on YouTube. It is also the final chapter of his book "The Art of Doing Science and Engineering", which, IMHO, is worth reading in its entirety.
Not necessarily. Unless the presence of the accusation already was used to get that 30% number, you also need to take into account the a priori probability of someone maliciously lying (or better yet, the particular accuser to be lying in this case) and apply Bayes's theorem.
I was replying to your original post, did not notice you posted something different here. Formatting a string and then either returning it or sending it to stdout (or any other stream) has too much in common. The work is done in the formatting, sending is just an after thought.
In a sense, this is similar to the parentheses and the prefix notation: it can be distracting if you are not used to it, but after a while it becomes very convenient.
And I do not mean to sound snobbish, but you can easily write a couple macros to have different syntax for these two tasks if it really bothers you.