romanows

This may portend big things in the future, but this specific hack didn't do a lot of damage. These are both AI companies, and I'm sure part of Huggingface finds it a fascinating object of study. It's great that not every indiscretion is met with lawsuits and jail time.

75.6% die is right, it's just that the other 24.4% do too.

The probability calculator doesn't really help, since the core question for me is how one arrives at its "Probability that misalignment leads to an unrecoverable global catastrophe.".

I'd like to know how these people arrive at their estimates. Why 10% and not 1% or 50%?

I don't think it's particularly unusual for a company to spin off another company?

I wonder if the better approach would have been to lead engineering with a similar reliance on bending rules and "what you can get away with". This is where multiplying estimates by PI comes in, I think. And possibly some creative division of responsibilities to make it harder for a CEO to officially bully engineering. Totally different job than most engineers would (or could) want to perform- the guy probably wouldn't have taken the promotion in this case!

I find this anecdote fascinating because, while I identify completely with the new head of engineering, his requirement really only makes sense if you interpret it as a commitment to build at a certain level of quality, business be damned. Which is fine, but then he folds at the first test of this principle! Didn't even let the business sweat for a day!

This could be a lesson for us engineers to be a little less glib and a little more introspective, especially as you gain more power and influence in an org.

I agree in general, but this article claims that the unionized tech workers now have pay increases, cheaper health benefits, and layoff protections. There is also a discussion about the process. This article at least is not just "unions good" (waves hands).

"own" in the sense of "be responsible for the consequences". Not in the sense of "be able to grant reproduction rights".

Your link talks about how hard it is to define science fiction, so in some ways, I'm just putting my opinion out here on the internet as a data point. I'd say the Left Hand of Darkness is more science fiction than Little Women, but it's also more like the Hobbit than it is like Foundation, Ender's Game, Snow Crash, or even 1984.

Having something like another planet or alien biology is necessary but not sufficient to make something science fiction. There is some fuzzy amount of focus on science/technology, style, and tropes that are needed to make something more science fiction than fantasy or speculative fiction. The Left Hand of Darkness read more like fantasy to me, and I don't think it would have been any different at all if the setting was Middle Earth and the ambisexual species were Hobbits. I think I wouldn't have blinked if it had been described as "science fantasy" to me rather than "science fiction".

I'll bump up Chiang on my reading list, I have heard a lot of good things!

It's great that works for you but there is a reason we have these labels. I've definitely had the experience where I want to escape into some hard sci-fi, and so there's a reason I pick a book from that genre over Anna Karenina. And if someone told me that Anna Karenina was hard sci-fi, it'd color my experience with that book.

I've only read "The Left Hand of Darkness". It's a very well written book, but it didn't emphasize enough technology/science/engineering for me to consider it even soft science fiction. I guess she's doing the work of expanding the scope of what technology could be used in science fiction. I'm not sure that's super useful, since by her definition, almost every work of fiction will involve technology.

Now I want to write a science fiction story where the core technology is never written about explicitly and can only be inferred from its effect on the characters :P

Excessive amounts of emojis in generated README.md and sometimes in printed/logging outputs. I don't whether this is still an issue because I have a "Never use emojis" instruction in the context.

I'm actually pretty thankful that the GP 5000 is a solid consensus recommendation for general road racing. I see some others being mentioned though, I think Pirelli Zeros?

Contrast that with gravel tires, where there is zero consensus. The conditions vary and the sport is evolving quite a bit over time as well, so it's understandable. But it's a huge time suck to try and puzzle out a near-optimal decision. I wish there was a "good-enough" consensus.

NPR/public radio has been doing a decent job without much obtrusive third-party advertising.

Lol, the description text is so dramatic.

It also really bugs me when I've put more time into reporting an issue or setting someone up for success than they've spent working on a solution.

You would know best, but it struck me that one reason to skip parts of a take-home interview assignment is that it was taking far longer than it "should". A sufficiently senior candidate should have noted this but (I'm feeling charitable towards junior candidates this lazy Sunday afternoon) maybe that's something that's a reasonable thing for them to learn in a real job.

I had it process a photo of my D&D character sheet and help me debug it as I'm a n00b at the game. Also did a decent, although not perfect, job of adding up a handwritten bowling score sheet.

Obviously. The point is that settling a lawsuit in this way is also a worthless indicator of wrongdoing.

The next sentence under the headline is "Tech company denied illegally recording and circulating private conversations to send phone users targeted ads".

As long as you hold the copyright to your "validate" project, you can dual license it. So can release it under the (A)GPL and also use it in your closed-source commercial project. I think you would need to make contributors sign a contributor license agreement (CLA) though, to continue using their contributions to "validate" in your closed-source offering.

Ah, you meant "sharing my e-mail addresses". Not the actual emails (the email contents) themselves.

I gotta say I'm skeptical of Gmail sharing emails with third parties without permission. Was there a breach? Govt court order?

Any idea if there is an argument for moving it if it obstructs sidewalk traffic, whether or not it sustains damage in the process?

I feel like you can't just leave a washing machine blocking the sidewalk unattended and sue anyone who scratches it while moving it? (IANAL)

I've seen a few in Lakeview but my experience hasn't been entirely the same as yours. I haven't noticed blinding lights at night. They seem to move relatively slowly and cautiously.

I came upon one as I was jogging last night and was worried about getting around it. It, or someone driving it, seemed to notice me coming and it waited at a spot where it was easy to pass.

That said, these are a bad idea. Like another commenter mentioned, these are going to obstruct people with mobility issues or devices, or obstruct everyone when all but a narrow strip of sidewalk is snow and ice.

I use Firefox Mobile Nightly on Android and appreciate it for the dark mode extension and ad blocking. There are some issues but the benefits outweigh them for me.

I don't even have a Home button that I can see, I must have turned it off in settings? I describe my tab count using scientific notation, though, so I'd be a "new tab" guy, anyway. But I'd also be a proponent of it being configurable.

Kinda related, I wish there was an easy way to exclude dependencies at pip-install time and mock them at runtime so an import doesn't cause an exception. Basically a way for me to approximate "extras" when the author isn't motivated to do it for me, even though it'd be super brittle.

I "open image in a new tab" and can then pinch to zoom in the new tab, too.

"Yes, coffee is mostly water, with standard black coffee consisting of about 98% to 99% water..."