lucaslazarus

I don’t get why people find it so hard to understand that a technology can be value-additive and still be in a position of massive overinvestment. Every generation of Californians seeks to relive the 1848 gold rush, spending millions excavating rivulets for mere ounces of (very real!) gold.

This is so relatable, though it has a strange downside. I've had tinnitus for as long as I can remember and always thought I was some superhuman child who could hear electricity. Didn't actually realize it was tinnitus until I heard it at the top of a mountain I was hiking in remote New Mexico a few years ago. I probably got it from chronic sinusitis as a child, but I'm still not sure what to make of it.

Presumably some kind of Radix Sort: you ask the crowd to split up and group together by month, let the people in each group self-sort and organize however they'd like, and then just concatenate the sorted queues together

This idea is not supported by the study in question. Even if it were, what you’re describing is just how science works! The cynicism, while understandable, seems widely irrelevant here.

Link to paper: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393969224_3D-Printe...

You may like the Subwaydle: https://www.subwaydle.com/

Yes, because cell phones can do it even without a SIM card

Clearly the issue is real and not imaginary

Is this Jane Street propaganda?

On a tangentially-related note: does anyone have a good intuition for why ChatGPT-generated images (like the one in this piece) are getting increasingly yellow? I often see explanations attributing this to a feedback loop in training data but I don't see why that would persist for so long and not be corrected at generation time.

Perhaps, but it's worth hedging against a potential Trump-Zuck fallout. Also, the statute of limitations for commencing an antitrust investigation is 4 years (15 U.S.C. § 15b).

Strikes me more as an attempt to maintain plausible deniability if/when the FTC comes knocking

Reminds me of Kranzberg’s First Law:

> “Technology is neither good nor bad; nor is it neutral.”

This is great! Now all that's left is plugging this into some text-to-speech and a subway surfers/minecraft parkour background

Caveat that this is yet to be peer reviewed, but I wonder if this is the leaded gasoline of our times

> Editor’s Note: This story was originally written in August 2024 based on a preprint, which is an early copy of a paper that had not yet been peer-reviewed. It has been updated to reflect the final peer-reviewed and published paper in Nature.

Why 202[3-9] though?