rootlocus

That's why I mentioned it wasn't a brusque development, he acted the same way when he was a baby.

I can tell you 100% my toddler gets extremely frustrated when he can't do something by himself. And it wasn't a brusque development, babies get frustrated when they want to turn on the side and can't. Also, they're extremely joyful when they finally manage to do it on their own, and they'll do it constantly.

> doubt they even know what agency is

I doubt some people know what epicaricacy is, but they do it anyway.

> quite representative

Under first-past-the-post, and electoral college, there isn't that much representation even with the popular vote.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo

> I still think you want companies to want to cooperate with governmental leadership in a well-functioning democracy

Without education, people will succumb to bias, propaganda and misinformation, often voting against their own interests. There's already a fundamental issue with capitalism favouring profit above anything else, leading to a lot of the current issues with (for example) privatization of health care. I don't think you can have a functional democracy without education. As a species we keep falling into a pattern of a wealth gap, followed by extremism, followed by wars, followed by poverty, while at every individual step we find reasons why it's perfectly fine.

> Then you'd add an additional cluster for running auxiliary service, this is services that has special network access or are not related to you "main product". Maybe a few of these. Still there's a long way to 47.

Why couldn't you do that with a dedicated node pool, namespaces, taints and affinities? This is how we run our simulators and analytics within the same k8s cluster.

> As the number of microservices grew, each service often got its own dedicated cluster

It's a black box that takes human produced artwork without consent and spits out superficial mediocre content a dime a dozen. It also takes away developer time and focus from other aspects of the software. I don't think you need to understand the algorithms underneath to have a problem with that.

1. Swapping to disk would kill the performance to an unnacceptable level.

2. I'm assuming video editing software works on a raw format in memory with access to individual frames? Just like Photoshop would need access to individual pixels from an importend JPEG, the actual canvas uses a lot more memory than the compressed input format.

I think all who offer a discount if you buy a license for a whole year but pay by month. I don't see the problem with them requesting you pay the original amount for the months you used the product if you cancel before the year is out.

You entered a contract where you promised to pay for a year, and they gave you a smaller fee. You cancel the contract, so they should cancel the discount.

> indicating her voice was protected against unauthorized use

But it wasn't her voice, it was the voice of the impersonator. By that logic, the impersonator can never speak without authorization because the impersonator would use Bette Midler's voice.

Art is like a lossy compression algorithm. If there is a soul of any form the only reason you think you're observing it in human-produced art is because your decompression algorithm is adding it.

While I don't disagree there's a "human touch" to art, I'm not convinced it can't be synthesized to some degree. It may not be innovative, but I think since AI is extrapolating from learned data, it can at least mimic the current pop culture.

There's a surprising number of pop songs that use the same or close to the same chord progression.

> Similarly zig’s stdlib shouldn’t allocate behind your back, except for thread spawn where it does

shouldn't X, exceptor for Y where it does [X]

It makes perfect sense that GP was saying "thread spawn allocates behind your back".

> The blog post make it seem like the author is just expecting srht to be exactly like GitHub

The author complains users don't use the mailing list correctly or at all. That's something the author expects to work the way srht intended, but the users expect it to work like github. And that's pretty much the point of the article.

Looking at the JSON, I assume this is a higher level format that may output SVG. For instance, the arrows between nodes are defined by reference to node names and node sides. In SVG that would be a hardcoded curve and shape for the arrow which loses the semantic meaning "there's a relation between two nodes", where nodes may also have semantic meaning such as "idea" or "book".

A tool may parse the json canvas file and extract information such as "there are three ideas linked to this book". Another tool may output an SVG.

It's surprising Amdahl's Law isn't even mentioned in this article, even though it starts with a perfect example of it in the first paragraph.

That's what I don't get either. If they can shove off one of their top 1500 customers (probably much higher) and, as someone put it, "everyone is using them", that means unless you're one of the top few hundred customers, this can absolutely happen to you. Which is what people are upset about.

I think the problem people have is that all those other hallucinations were happenstance mistakes, while skin color was added intentionally as a bias through the development of the model. The AI was specifically told "ignore facts, improve diversity", meaning someone deliberately decided diversity was more important than facts. That someone (or multiple someone) has authority at one of the largest companies on earth. This shows the company is willing to add bias for whatever reason.

These are the companies we expect will drive AI development to the point where it will replace a lot of the jobs humans do. Are we OK allowing them to purposefully retell history to hide ugly or inconvenient truths? There are already lots of people believing slaves were "expensive" or treated well, that it might have been a great honor to "work" for their great great grandfathers. Where did they get that idea I wonder?

> It's an AI model who cares? It's not like anyone is getting their facts from it

People at large are definitely getting their facts from it. Just like a non-negligible number of people consume fake news as facts.

> It's less popular than Lua today, which has no package manager.

https://luarocks.org/

You've just summarized the abstract, which summarizes the entire article and barely exceeds a few sentences.

It's not just "the simplest interface", it's the de-facto application/web page for playing Chess. You'll find grandmasters like Magnus Carlsen and Hikaru Nakamura playing there. You can access their games and every game ever played on the website. You can track your performance, analyze your games, train with puzzles, play against various bots, etc.

Data hoarding doesn't immediately or visibly affect you. It's a mistake to compare it to oppression.

> Gen z and alpha will be the ones to solve these problems after the boomer luddites making insanely uninformed decisions are out of the picture.

That's a very optimistic hope, and I dare say naive. Aside from name-calling, I don't see an argument for your prediction.

Maybe now Affinity Designer can introduce a tracing feature and further catch up to Adobe Illustrator.

> If the economy wanted to extract anything from these people, it would make sure they were working.

If people don't raise people, there soon won't be people to economy. You have to invest in people (education, welfare, etc.) before they invest into the economy. These black-and-white deductions only make sense for spherical cows in void.

I think my wife would love to explore the game again, and I think we could maybe tune some dungeons so they're doable by just two players, but we're parents now and some things are just not possible anymore.

This reminds me of Wildstar. The MMO was intentionally dedicated to hardcore players, making progression nearly impossible for casuals. They were pretty smug about it as I recall. It eventually died, as there weren't enough players paying micro-transactions to keep the servers online.

> Of course, the packet should allow blocking not only a single address, but a whole network, for example, 1.2.3.4/16.

So, if my neighbour is infected and one of his devices is part of a botnet, I get blocked as well?

> In other words, you asked a maintainer to accept an inferior fix just so you can put “kernel contributor” on your resume.

He asked to accept "a patch" not "the patch". You left out the next sentence: "I was also open to working with him, addressing his feedback and sending subsequent versions of patches."

That doesn't give credit for 5 days of debugging. It gives credit for raising the issue, which was already done, six years prior.

Someone spent 5 days debugging and giving the explicit details of the problem and a proposed solution. They should be given some credit, even if the exact lines of code that fix the problem weren't the ones proposed. The maintainer could've just given the feedback required for the contributor to submit the desired patch. Or some metadata on the commit could've offered attribution to the contributor. From the article, this was 90% the work of the contributor and 10% (maybe?) the work of the maintainer. Considering that being mentioned as a contributor to the kernel is a Big Thing, completely neglecting to give any mention is poor taste.