gitfan86

The way I read it is that US citizens have a right to not be murdered or assaulted by people who enter the country illegally.

So it seems like a Judge would have an obligation to prevent someone accused of being in the country illegally and accused of a violent crime to not leave the courthouse and instead turn that person over to the federal authorities who are outside the court waiting for the proceedings to finish.

I'm not following the logic here. There are tons of free tier AI products available. That makes the world more fair for people in very poor countries not less.

This is the nature of social media. If you see 10 examples of something happening in another country there is a good chance you will alter your behavior.

The reverse scenario is happening too. There are americans that refuse to go to europe because of the examples they seen of immigrants committing crimes and ruining neighborhoods.

As someone who spends a lot of time on both locations, I know that both scenarios are rare, and can logically overcome the emotional response after seeing examples online. But for people who don't travel much I understand.

How frequently a wave would go through just 1 of the slits. If you threw a baseball at a wall with two baseball sized slits it would basically always go through just one of the slits. You would never see an interference pattern.

This is because a baseball is interacting with other matter on the way to the slit. A photon on the other hand might not interact with any matter and it stays as a wave and you can see an interference pattern on the other side.

Particles don't exist. We just perceive waves with high decoherence rates as particles. Things we call objects effectively have a 100% decoherence rate. Things we call waves like light have low decoherence rates.

But underneath it is all quantum mechanics.

Vision related tasks like Waymo self driving cars and then also productivity enhancement like coding assistance and writing.

There is a interesting dynamic of supply and demand here. 1% is basically free for all existing use cases today.

BUT new use cases are now realistic. The question is how long until demand for the new use cases shows up

Does China make cheap and fast DRAM?

I'm calling a very small orange an orange and people are saying it isn't a real orange because it should be bigger so I show them a bigger orange and they say not big enough. And that continues forever.

Regardless of how valid the study is, it is most likely useless.

These kinds of studies have been done for decades and type 2 diabetes rates have only gone up.

There has been clear evidence for decades that obesity and high carb diets increase risk of diabetes. Comparing tea to coffee or Skittles to m&Ms is a useless research project as far as diabetes goes. Because it is extremely unlikely that someone will discover that the cure for diabetes was a small change in lifestyle like that.

Right, but even at that point the sceptics will still stay that it isn't "truly general" or unable to do X in the same way a human does. Intelligence like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

No human ever got good at Tennis without learning the rules. Why would we not allow an AI to also learn the rules before expecting it to get good at tennis.

Yes, AGI was here at AlphaGo. People don't like that because they think it should have generalized outside of GO, but when you say AGI was here at AlphaZero which can play other games they again say not general enough. At this point is seem unlikely that AI will ever be general enough to satisfy the sceptics for the reason you said. There will always be some domain that requires training on new data.

Why is it real GDP when a government contractor makes a PDF report, but isn't real GDP when I make a poem?

Anyone who is afraid of AI should ask yourself if you think we should ban printers so that secretaries can he hired to use typewriters? If not, why do people who want a secretary job not deserve one?

This seems like the most likely answer to the Fermi paradox. Our assumptions about time and space are wrong.

If we understood them we wouldn't be looking this way

You said "presidents have the power to do whatever they want". Do you not understand what that means?

So when Biden lost lawsuits he was also being a dictator?

I can simply it for you.

In 2007 the average person on HN was considered progressive or left leaning because they generally felt that same sex marriage should be legal.

Those same people in 2025 are now considered "far right" by the left because they believe that women have a right to say they feel uncomfortable being exposed to penises in the locker room when playing college sports.

If you are genuinely curious I would suggest reading Paul Graham's essay on wokeness.

Did you miss the election?

There was a lawsuit to stop the firings. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it unconstitutional.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/federal-judge-wont-stop-tru...

How can you have a functional democracy where the person who was elected to lead the executive branch and who also campaigned on increasing efficiency is not allowed to do that? Especially after the judicial branch has OKed it.

HN has attracted a lot of Woke people over the years, but also still has a lot of OG tech nerds.

Calling everyone a NAZI does seem to be the current tactic of the left.

There is a balance in process vs. efficiency.

The idea that anyone removing any processes is only doing it to insert corruption isn't a valid argument against efficiency

Asking Jordan and EGYPT to take Palestinian immigrants is the same thing as sending them to the gas chamber?

No I'm not, I'm saying that if you want to compare a group to 1930s Germany you should look at the people who defended the Oct 7 attacks and who are against free speech

What do you think is the best way for a voter to decide if Harris would be a good steward of tax payer money?

Removing the process is the improvement. This is what we voted for. Less processes not more and actual results.

Ask ChatGPT to compare and contrast Kamala Harris's effectiveness as "broadband Tzar" as compared to SpaceX Starlink.