2,932 karma · joined December 17, 2017
Earth is two thirds water, and it rains. The water I drank this morning is million of years old. It will be around for millions more.
So, they pump some water out of the earth and it evaporates... It will come back down, and we aren't running out anytime soon.
Why do we care? Are they building these things in deserts? If so that's the problem. They should use closed loops if they want to build in the desert.
Did you notice the line in the article that says the models had access to an offline copy of THE INTERNET. Like all of it.
On most devices Dolby Vision, etc get downgraded or support only the streaming profiles (profile 5) . If you want full Atmos, Dolby Vision, etc you have to buy one of only a handful of devices. The Vero V is one of them. There are only a few others.
They took Aristotles rhetoric, and turned it into a slimy dead thing that seeks profit rather than truth.
Advertising is sophistry, and sophistry is evil.
I paid for windows. I am the customer. I am not not the product.
I actually like Windows, or did for most of my nearly 30 year career. In the past I have defended it against the "winblows" crowd.
Now there are no new features that users want, the start menu is a progressive web app, explorer takes 2x3 times the resources it did in 10 and does less, and they have lost all respect for me as a consumer.
I'm one ad away from migrating everything I own to a system that respects me. It will be an investment, but I suspect it will be worth it.
The new macs look nice.
If you only care about file playback, bit still care about things like HDR and quality audio I would recommend something like the OSMC Vero V instead.
It's still relatively cheap, and open source, but also let's you playback something like a blu-ray rip without loss of quality.
It has the other bonus of not requiring any real setup or maintenance.
The worst reason to hate it is that it relies on proving intent (dolus specialis), which essentially makes it unenforceable unless the perpetrator is a group of simpletons.
It really hit me when I realized that there are only two ways to prove intent: The criminal admits it, or the prosecution proves that there are literally zero other possible explanations that could possibly fit the actions.
So - Back to the point. Did the USA assist people guilty of genocide by your own chosen definition? Not if there could be literally any other intention.
Keep in mind that Hamas's own convention (1988) clearly declares that they partly exist as a group for the purpose of wiping Israel out, and they did actually perpetrate October 7th. It would be very difficult for even the best lawyer in the world to argue that self-defense couldn't be at least one possible intention, and given that the nation of Israel probably has one or two decent lawyers, they'd likely be able to come up with a few other possible intentions as well, but they only need one to completely avoid prosecution.
A second reason to hate it is that it doesn't carve out exceptions for mutual combat situations, even the ones that that have been dragging on for thousands of years. When two religious groups or ethnicities from neighboring regions fight each other in open combat few reasonable people would refer to that as a genocide, but it might be considered genocide against both sides if we interpret the UN Convention as it was actually ratified.
> even the intellectually laziest persons
Yo mama.
To be more serious, this wasn't necessary and was rude. What was your goal? To convince me? To convince others? Neither are best accomplished with this sort of behavior.
The machines don't have that, instead we use gradient descent to provide them with a goal.
I'm regularly remind of something Ian M. Banks said in one of the Culture books: "There is a saying that we provide the machines with an end, and they provide us with the means."
A machine, left to itself, wants nothing. We have to give it one of our addiction driven goals or it would just idle or switch itself off.
Even verbatim's own website no longer makes the thousand year claim. Saying instead "several hundred years".
However their website also claims that the disc's use "etched" stone-like data layers, which is also demonstrably not true. Their own marketing says titanium in other places (on the spindle insert).
I think that Verbatim (or their shambling post-buyout animated corpse) just lies a lot or is filled with confusion about their own product.
https://www.verbatim.com/en/m-disc/products/43847-m-disc-bd-...
> I'm not sure what you mean by "Verbatim just slaps their brand on other people's discs".
I wasn't aware of the chain of ownership. That said, they literally sell the same disc identifier as both m-disc and non m-disc.
I don't think it's just a reused ID either. If you put them next each other they're identical, and they use the same media label. The old disc's were both visually distinct and had a unique ID.
The only difference zeems to be packaging. I don't doubt that it's the same quality.
They stopped selling the much worse LTH discs and all the disc's are good now.
M-disc buyers get what they pay for (if they expect 100 years rather than 1000), it's just that everyone else also gets that for less money.
I don't disagree that a few things that happen today will be of consequence. I disagree that any single source of that data needs to last for a thousand years in isolation.
There are, I'm sure, one or two examples of thousand+ year old primary sources revealing otherwise lost information that was still relevant in some way. I suspect not many, other than as datum for academics to ponder.
Important information has always survived by copying.
As we age out of being culturally relevant, and newer (likely less literate) generations take over the definitions will change, and perhaps should.
To me only hard science fiction will ever count, but I recognize that I'm in the minority there and also don't want to scare away the three remaining readers through gatekeeping.
For what? Nothing we do today will be even remotely important in 1,000 years. Any tiny fraction of a fraction that is important will have been copied thousands, millions, or billions of times into various formats.
"I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed:
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away."
The discs sold as M-Discs now are actually just MABL BD-R's. They used to have a 'stone' data layer. Now they use a titanium metal data layer. MABL discs were always designed to last for about 100 years, and are orders of magnitude cheaper.
100 years is long enough, and 1000 years was always a wild-ass theoretical abstraction. The point is that you'll be dead before your disc is. If the next generation cares and drives are still available they can copy it to a new source.
These same discs are sold with a "Guarantee" as archival discs that are tested with heat/stress to last that 100 years, but any MABL disc really should,and they're much cheaper if you just get regular MABL discs. I think Pioneer is one of the big brands making the archival discs, or at least branding them. I last had to import mine from Japan. If you check the disc ID though, you'll see that archival discs are literally the same disc you can by cheaper without that label.
Some M-Discs still have a proprietary disc label, but my understanding is that even those just come off the same lines.
Some reading:
https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/yu4j1u/psa_ver...
https://blu-raydisc.info/licensee-list/discmanuid-licenseeli... (search for verbatim and note the manufacturer column)
The earth is 2/3's water. If you don't have enough near you that's because you live in a bad place for humans and should move. Not because a data center let some evaporate and rain back down as fresh water.
However, when I was growing up most serious computer scientists believed that CV (computer vision) was a 'hard' problem that would never be 'solved'. After all, to do it right you must first at least solve subgraph isomorphism and a bunch of other things that are also NP-complete.
What they missed was that we don't actually NEED to solve it in a fixed amount of time. Even for things like driving a car the stochastic heuristic based answer is 'good enough'. e.g. - Cars driven by computers don't have to be perfect, they just have to kill other drivers less often than humans do.
We can find AN answer in polynomial time, and that's good enough. It might not be the ideal answer, but that doesn't matter in the real world.
People use NP complete as shorthand for 'impossible to do with a computer', but we now 'solve' (bypass?) NP complete problems regularly and at scale by just ignoring the fact that our answers aren't perfect.
> I'd love to see that chat log, and the final board. To be fair I've only been testing on nontrivial PCBs with 6+ layers and I haven't had the luck you have.
I wish I could share it, but it's for a commercial project that hasn't been released yet and I'm not sure if it will be open source, but a few folks have asked. I might do a blog post on it this weekend with as much detail as I can safely post.
It's only 3 layers, and less that 30 components, but the fact remains that I didn't design any of it by hand and it worked on the first go.
It was a pretty simple rp2040 based thing, similar to Adadfruits USB feather.I just gave it kicad and it wrote python to route it. The board was probably larger than it had to be, and two of the silkscreens were swapped, but it worked on the first go.
FWIW - Computer vision is also NP complete, but we do that all the time now.
Bah. It's obviously been too long since I flossed between my ears. Sorry about that.
Nothing about my point changes. You're just looking for something about it to attack by trying to find the worst version of it again.
We're all (presumably) human, and we all make mistakes in phrasing, grammar, etc. Most of us don't have the time or motivation to craft every sentence into a finely honed razor of logical and grammatical accuracy, and shouldn't have to just to be understood.
DHH's statements were the same sort of thing. He could have said exactly the same thing with different words and nobody would have been angry, but he shouldn't have to.
People just WANT to find a reason to hate each other.
Seriously, why can't Android just be installed? Are they building it like the old-timey kernel before modules and embedding drivers in a giant monolith or something ridiculous?
The lady that killed her kids went cuckoo, killed her kids and jumped out a window almost killing herself. Nobody is defending baby-murder, they're just saying 'Yeah, crazy people should get help BEFORE this junk happens.' The jurors agreed that she wasn't responsible for her actions at the time, and they weren't all left wing.
The other one... I think that you're talking about Carmen Lizet Puch? Literally no-one anywhere is defending that one. Maybe some weirdos on fringe internet forums, because there's always another nut out there willing to defend anything... Nobody in the mainstream from either side is defending it, but some right-wing folks are intentionally strawman'ing it as if someone were.
There's a lot of BS coming from both sides that could be avoided if the larger world followed the HN advice to always argue against the best version of the other persons argument, rather than to try and construct the weakest possible version and attack that.
People just WANT to be mad, and they want this guys poor choice of words to mean he's somehow advocating for ethnic cleansing or violence or something. He's just an average conservative with an anti-immigration stance. Not a monster.
I never really took the conservative whining about cancel culture seriously, but I'm starting to understand how being caught up in something like this could drive someone from middle right to far right.
"There's absolutely nothing racist or xenophobic in saying that Denmark is primarily a country for the Danes, Britain primarily a united kingdom for the Brits, and Japan primarily a set of islands for the Japanese."
I interpret him to be advocating for less immigration, and maybe some deportations of criminal types. He's allowed to.
Personally, I disagree with him, but we're all adults. We're allowed to disagree and still respect each other. That's the basis of society.
He's not advocating for violence and the hyperbole some people are coming up with is way overblown when compared to what he actually said.
He is an average right-wing adult. Not some rabid fascist who wants death-camps.