fedeb95

who detects the down detectors's down detector's downs?

Imagine a world without patents and tariffs. Imagine a world where companies can freely compete (no patents) and, most importantly, *have* to (no tariffs).

no problem, AA has a very good search bar.

yes, but the cost of using such services must be offset by how much you gain. We'll see in the future

I sometimes think about the same things. As of now, my best bet is that math is one of the disciplines studying exactly these questions.

yes but their growth isn't driven by actual profits. It's a bet.

This page contains some interesting advice I didn't know, useful for traveling in general. Traveling without a luggage is a staple of mine, but I am not at this pro level yet.

For other commenters, overcoming materialism means not being attached to objects. Not necessarily living on a backpack. The idea is to have objects if you can, but don't suffer for their loss, or their gain. Seneca, the stoic thinker, might be a great read to start.

Planetes is a great anime on the topic of space junk, recommended.

Exactly

This article seems great, I will finish it later.

Congratulations on making the life of ~2k people a bit better.

if those people don't need passwords and accounts, they probably want to do very little with their phone. hence they don't need an iPhone.

Otherwise, if they want to use email, whatsapp, etc., they also want passwords and accounts, hence security measures must be there. Someone has to help them.

it's not that without digital ID you didn't need verification. At least in Italy, digital identities means don't having to go attending lengthy queues in public offices, where paper identities where usually checked. Sometimes you still have to do it.

What I agree with, is that some system is needed to help those without an identity, or at the border of the system. Digital stuff can help there too.

no way, something on the internet disappeared?

Very cool. I'll probably use it, but not for AI. I have lots of pdfs for which an epub doesn't exist.

Or if anything I'll add it to the projects-that-already-do-this-but-havent-yet-found list.

do you have any pointers on where to start? Books maybe. Thanks

thanks, these are interesting indeed!

what's most interesting to me about this research is that it is an online collaborative one. I wonder how many more project such as this there are, and if it could be more widespread, maybe as a platform.

that's not what I wrote

*string representations of concepts

thanks for the book suggestions.

try waking up 3-4 hours before work and do something else you want to do but requires more energy. It's hard to keep the habit in today society, but it can be done.

Typically you can do your work good enough with less energy, if you've worked in the same place long enough.

Am I the only one thinking this urge to optimize our time is just anxiety? I'd argue not spending time worried about time usage would make one use better its time.

I'm not referring to the article per se, but to this kind of articles in general.

On this article: why school is considered not discretionary time? Also commute and meals are somewhat discarded. While cooking, or helping, read a poem or a short story; while commuting, read a book, listed to some good music. This way, discretionary time becomes 100%.

Monopolies naturally come from doing a thing the best possible way. YouTube does it. I personally use it very rarely and wouldn't care about its disappearance, but I don't know of other services serving its users needs better.

So: YouTube will cease to be a monopoly if 1) user needs change 2) it stops being the best at serving videos. Until then, it's not mysterious.

that they worked for money doesn't mean money was the only thing attached to their art. You quoted a period very different from now, where there wasn't any stupid royalty or copyright: you had to work in order to earn money, if you were a painter, that meant making new paintings.

I'm not stating that today technologies don't bring up new questions. But making silly laws that go against the nature of such technologies won't solve them.

not exactly. Literature existed way before physical books, as is the case of the Odyssey and other texts.

literature was born without copyright. It won't vanish

copying paper is not as easy as copying a file. You should try, even making a simple paper notebook that doesn't fall apart isn't easy, let alone print a book.

The tech industry may very well cease to exist as we know it, but the concept of a digital copy is way more powerful. My comment didn't have anything to do with LLMs, and you mentioning that technology points out to a shallow understanding what digital means.

But the proof will lay in history. Any restriction can be easily overcome because of the nature of the digital world. Only a forceful dictatorial state can make effective restrictions (to some extent), and unless one advocates for that, thus effectively banning the technology itself if not only for some privileged users, one has to accept the nature of what humans have discovered: that counting on his finger (digital is from the latin digitus) can replace its analog counterparts in many situations. Has long has you have fingers you can count, unless someone cuts them off.

Copyright restrictions of digital contents is a vestige of the past. Given today technologies, it is rather obsolete.

For those thinking it goes against artists, keep in mind that a lot of art today is simply garbage made only for money. If something is made only for money, it is not art, and indeed I can understand why those making it advocate so strongly for copyright restrictions, money being the only thing attached to their art.

The digital world, making it extremely easy to access and copy human knowledge, is an achievement of the human mind. Patreons, or an art world evolving alongside society and other jobs, may be one of the possible natural adaptations to this human achievement. Otherwise we're making the same arguments as Luddites.

For the unrestricted copyright inclined, there are ways to stay in legality, if such inclinations collide, and they are fruitful. You will find that consuming only public domain content will be a plus, not a privation.

yes but you have to type sfhit+enter, while a single "new line key inside the message" would be better for the specific task.