bryanrasmussen

Since Maple Leaf Rag wasn't published until 1895 maybe they felt it wasn't ragtime until then? Although my understanding, which I thought was pretty conventionally agreed on, has always been that Joplin appearing at the fair was what helped make ragtime a national pop phenomenon of his time. But maybe I should reconsider that because ragtime didn't become big until after 96-97.

I definitely think of the 1893 world's fair in the context of time travel, mainly to see Scott Joplin https://medium.com/luminasticity/ten-concerts-you-must-see-i...

So, how many fields are there that cannot be used for other things? It seems reasonable to position solar panels over things that are already serving some purpose and the quality of that service will not be negatively affected by a solar panel placement above it.

I don't think I said anything about word level?

The 12% of human posts that do what AI do in repeating things, are they human slop?

I personally don't think it is possible to identify human and AI, it is however probably more possible to identify unoriginal and boring quality writing and art.

This was perhaps not clear from my first post, as I tend to imply points rather than tediously stating them.

The idea is that AI slop is non-creative boring crap, to really determine if you are able to identify AI slop then it should be determined if you misidentify human slop as AI slop.

Idea 1: Identify the worst most boring human marketing, organizational, bureaucratic texts from the a time before AI was writing it, anonymize this text to make sure there is no reference to current events that can be used to determine that it is not AI. And then see if the AI will say hey, that is not AI slop.

Idea 2: Have people parody AI slop. Can it determine the parody is still not AI slop?

OK so this law, enacted now and not in effect yet, which bans rental fees, is the cause of why big progressive cities that in general do not have this law, have the most unaffordable housing. That's a theory, I guess.

So how exactly is an ad for a play by an author who died 85 years ago political and requiring regulation? A person who died so long ago that, even in the EU with its onerous copyright regime, her work is in the public domain!?

It is a general thing that people only want to ban or regulate things that are against the social standards of their political organization, feminism and civil rights are two things that are pretty central to the EU. I know they must be, because I always read American right-wing commentators say about how feminism and civil rights are destroying the EU. For this reason I do not believe it is actually normal compliance with any regulation, it is malicious compliance meant to undermine the regulation.

I am sure some person who is glad for the malicious compliance would like to make a statement to the effect that it is the EU's fault that Meta has done it this way, so allow me to forestall it with some other observations.

If Meta feels the law requires them to remove ads for any art that supports a cause, including causes that are considered mainstream and accepted in the EU, then almost no art can ever advertised.

Guernica may not be shown, as it was anti-fascist, AND I should note Picasso's works are still under copyright so we know that's got to be regulated STAT!

The works of anyone who has ever been against slavery must not be mentioned, no Twain, Melville, Stowe, etc. etc.

But let's not stop there, surely Shakespeare's Richard III did not support that fellow's claims to the throne of England and we should not discuss it, don't tell me anything about it being a long time ago - if for Meta Virginia Wolf springs eternal then surely Shakespeare should get the same benefit of censorship. Dante's taking sides in the civil wars that damaged the Italy of his time should allow us to throw him off the platform as well!

There is very little art and few artists in this world that have been so anodyne that Meta could not censor them for having supported a social issue. I certainly hope they will do so, and quickly, so that people may be persuaded to abandon the platform. I also hope that this post is clear enough that I don't have to hear any more about how Meta had to do it the way they did, as I have recently been talking with my ex-wife, so my allowance for hearing dumb stuff is all used for today.

I would assume that linux devs are relatively older. Furthermore they are probably very knowledgeable in that area, and one thing I've noted on here is people who are knowledgeable not liking the quality of code output from LLMs, if they have stringent quality requirements it might be easier for them to write the code themselves.

original title: Kit foxes demonstrate adaptive compromise characteristics under intraguild predation pressure by coyotes in the Great Basin desert

fundament is a base of anything, amongst which the buttocks was the fundament of the human anatomy apparently.

>probably if you don't program already, unlikely if you do, they are more similar than different once you know the three classes (imperative, functional, logical)

I mean if it were that similarity made it not useful then it would surely be that you should only learn languages that are significantly different from ones you already know, but that does not seem to be the case from the admittedly not very detailed article.

>I suspect an amount of the same in human language, where learning french if you know spanish is less lift than learning a tonal language like mandarin

right, but they don't say that.

Maybe it is learning things different to you. But perhaps it is stimulating the parts of the brain that do the most relating of complicated concepts to each other. In which case it is just learning a bunch of words and what they refer to and how to structure these words together to discourse on ideas.

One common thing that is used to keep people from losing abilities in Alzheimer's diagnosis is using complicated skills like knitting, drawing. That is to say practicing complicated skills you already have prevents deterioration, so it seems reasonable to assume learning complicated skills does the same.

In which case it ends up being not very amazing information, as that is what I would naturally assume to be the case.

Use it or lose it.

it depends on how much interest was shown, I've definitely posted things and then they get posted again less than 24 hours later and it is that second post that takes off.

does this include programming languages which after all are a system of meaning?

original title: Human Motor Corpus Callosum: Topography, Somatotopy, and Link between Microstructure and Function

It seems like the kind of thing I would naturally post if I came across it, so a bunch of submissions over 3 days makes me think a bunch of people saw it and when they saw it said huh, I will submit to HN.

I think that makes more sense than some spam campaign for this.

Human Brain Evolved From Two Separate Organs.

maybe it tastes more oniony than most onions, these onions are the essential onions of which other onions are mere shadows.

I agree, we must focus all our energies on building the torment nexus!

the history of assembly lines would be instructive. I don't think we have achieved a fully automated assembly line yet, but certainly they are much more automated than they were when Ford set up the first one.

full title: Aesthetic Governance, Mega-Events and the Urban Poor: Beautification, Visibility and the Making of a ‘World-Class’ Delhi

well here is a branching strategy I often see, pseudocode, and often this is a really stupid example as I do not have the time to come up with a good one:

if Val === "A" then Do funcA() else if Val === "B" then

and so forth for lots of values, or using a switch statement or similar branching instead of

Object functions = { "A": funcA() {does what funcA does}, "B": funcB() {does what funcB does} etc. etc.

}

runnableFunction = functions[val]; runnableFunction();

Actually writing it I remember now someone who did this, a junior who had to update a validation function for XML invoices based on their root namespaces, which there could be a large number of these, and so she wrote out

switch namespace == "somenamespace" { validatingscheme = "someschema"; doPreliminaryFunctionToDetermineifshouldvalidate(); }

I can't remember all the details as this was almost 20 years ago, however while it was true that one branched on the schema, it made much more sense to look up what one was supposed to do based on the rule for branching and then just execute that one action rather than writing a bunch of branching logic.

So to make it more concrete: Once branching rules becomes sufficiently complex prefer query for what you should do rather than branching

on edit: note again, not real code, but should be understandable and translatable into real code to understand what is being said easily enough.

on 2nd edit: this is also just basically one of the things I prefer instead of getting a lot of branching logic. I have never seen any stats on any benefit to this model than just having a bunch of branching statements, but I feel that the benefit is there nonetheless.

original title: Applying eScriptorium’s Handwritten Text Recognition techniques to premodern Italian and Devanāgarī manuscripts

original title: Copyright without digital borders? The CJEU on geo-blocking, VPNs and territoriality

original title: Stag Beetle Is Priced at $90,000: But Who Is Buying the World’s Most Expensive Insect?

OK as always there are more ways for markets to split than analysis tells at the beginning. Interestingly enough this is probably also a good part of the luxury market.

I have always hated watches until I had a reasonably good one for a year, and lost it because ADHD just does not handle keeping track of things well.

But it seems to me people who refuse smart watches for normal watches probably are not doing so for crappy watches (and if you are for the rest of the post I shall assume you are the outlier). They must be reasonably luxurious brands that are preferred, as such there is a larger amount of the luxury market who might like smart rings (but this also seems off to me, who the hell wants to wear a crappy looking ring, in the luxury market.)

Maybe however the multiple watches look might catch on, like the stand-up routine of Harry Anderson the guy who used to play the judge on Night Court. He was a guy who could wear two or three watches on each hand, and maybe a couple on his ankles. That was style right there.

If you will not say what something is against, then it is by definition for nothing.

on edit: fixed grammatical error, based on bad keyboard gesture moving stuff around.

social stigmas work locally, AI agents contact globally, there are only two ways social stigma is going to really work:

1. If an AI agent contacting people becomes big enough news that everybody the operator know reads about it. So AI agents asking people to send it child porn seems an unlikely edge case, but sure if that happens the person whose agent it is will get the social stigma.

2. If the AI agent accesses the owner's contacts list and starts asking for people to send it money so it can complete its task.

I wrote my post an hour ago, immediately edited it 1 minute after to put the following in "on edit: note this is my idea of what smart rings should do, don't know what the normal ones do, so my idea that it should be a luxury item may not track actual situation"

you posted yours 44 minutes ago.

Assuming I made this stuff. It is useless to have smart rings do the primary stuff of what a smart watch does, so not monitor your pulse or that crap because anyone who has a smart ring should have a smart watch for that and the few people who don't want smart watches but do want smart rings would be such a small outlier group I wouldn't care.

The only way the concept of a smart ring makes sense to me is as a form of gestural navigation/usage for real world or virtual world inputs that would be similar in affect to media presentations of superpowers/magic.

Thus, with my smart ring I can walk towards my office and make the open gesture before getting to it and the door opens for me and I don't have to do the other stuff. I can make the open gesture but contact security also and it opens but contacts security.

I can make the close all the doors and lock the house gesture and only the smart ring open can open them etc.

Login open computer, I am using smart ring of course it does it.

Refuse to login open computer not using smart ring (obviously this has down sides, everything does)

Using smart ring but not you, give fake access computer in sandbox, contact security.

Obviously gestures would have to be customizable via your other smart world devices and computers and so forth. The benefits of an integrated platform.

Before anyone laughs at continual contact security. Smart ring is luxury and anyone who pays for that crap has enough money to pay for either personal security or at least an on call company, provided by smart ring services.

on edit: note this is my idea of what smart rings should do, don't know what the normal ones do, so my idea that it should be a luxury item may not track actual situation.

original title: Revisiting Europe's temperate forests: Palaeoecological evidence for an herbivory-driven woodland-grassland mosaic biome