subroutine

This image shows smoke rising from the temples:

https://tenochtitlan.thomaskole.nl/image_dest/newfire_twopea...

They already run coolant through tesla batteries so they must be water tight to some degree. The connectors got wet in this situation. That's just poor craftsmanship.

And are waterproof phones blowing up more often than phones a decade ago?

I still feel like it's a design flaw. Smartphones went through a similar headache period. Water damage killed countless phones, and the standard reply back then was it's your fault - pay up. In this case, it is arguable that cars should be more resistant to getting wet than phones.

I guess my question is, why isn't the battery and its early connecters better sealed off from water, and is there anything you can put in place to prevent bricking a $17k part if it detects water intrusion.

> If I'm not mistaken, it would have Hausdorff dimension 1

What is the Hausdorff dimension for a line?

> Keep repeating this process, and from a certain perspective, you’ll have nothing left: The resulting set will cover so little of the original line segment that its length will be zero. But it is, in both an intuitive and a mathematical sense, “bigger” than just a single point. Its Hausdorff dimension is about 0.6.

I don't follow. Can someone clarify what "it" is with a dimension of 0.6? Any point? Or all the points remaining after you remove specifically 1/3 from each remaining line segment a number (an infinite?) of times? Would it be different if we removed 1/4 repeatedly? Would it be different if the line was longer than 0 -> 1?

$33 dollars is the correct amount lol. It's coffee time fellas.

But saying "Google has the power to shut down my business if I express the wrong opinions on social media sites like HN" is something they're totally fine with?

What would the GDP of NYC be, if NYC didn't have a near monopoly on the proximity to high paying jobs in NY State? If every NYC job (aside from those that absolutely required people to work on-site) allowed full time WFH, my bet is that it would be significantly lower. And people with high paying wages would be more scattered around the state, requiring less subsidizing. It would also mean that not every highly educated person moves away to the city. Part of the reason urban and rural politics is so divided is that every smart kid from a small town goes away to college and never comes back. Some because they have no desire, but others because the job they want doesn't exist outside a metro.

As soon as WFH became an option people flocked away from cities. NYC lost 200k people over two years; SF lost 60k. I would say there is a large population of city folk who desire to move to more rural areas.

> How do you know that people are lazy by nature and not because their job sucks?

The two aren't mutually exclusive. I personally wouldn't say humans are lazy, but simply: people avoid doing things they find unenjoyable, but if they must do something unenjoyable they'll find ways to minimize their time spent doing it.

> Of course they have zero incentive to get anything done, they get paid regardless of how well the project gets done.

This makes it sound like freelancers get more work done, not because it's more enjoyable, but because they must to get paid.

> Maybe if they had the guts to leave a paycheck for browsing Reddit and started their own business they would have success too.

For some people, getting paid to browse reddit is one definition of success.

> When I work on my projects I have way more stamina than when I'm doing client work. I kind of have to resist the urge to kill myself all the time instead of doing that boring job and I keep reminding me I'll be able to build a villa with the money.

Huh... After reading this I need to rethink what you are even arguing. I assumed it was that freelancers put in more hours because the nature of their work is more fulfilling. But you're really just saying, yeah humans are lazy to the point of wanting death over client work, but at least with freelance I can frontload the actual number of miserable hours worked, instead of spreading them over 30 years.

Are you "ecstatic" about living close to an office or RTO mandates? The former is totally understandable. Shit, who wouldn't want to live next to a sparsely populated office, optional to use whenever you want. If you're stoked mgmt is pushing RTO because more chums at the water cooler... not great Bob

My company has roughly ~60 employees and leased a building with 60 offices and 5 conference rooms. They tried to get us to come in more often (than once a week), saying they couldn't justify giving everyone their own office if we continued at 20% capacity. Everyone basically said fine, whatever, we're cool with sharing. So we just moved to a new building with like 20 offices and 7 conference rooms, for $25k less per month rent; and it's actually way nicer. The day I go in is stacked with meetings and collabs, so I'm never in an office anyway. Mgmt is happy (for now) they are saving on overhead (100% indirect, so double-good); I think they've accepted there's no going back.

Your suspicion of people mentioning rocket scientists in a Space X post raises some suspicions.

> Human expertise will always be necessary.

I reckon this will prove to be untrue.

Yeah, a refugee who is also a highly qualified rocket scientist should raise some healthy suspicion at the least.

Or at least the refugees who are well qualified rocket scientists.

Interesting they chose Ashkenazi, given this ancestry is fairly unique.

https://gnomad.broadinstitute.org/news/images/2018/10/gnomad...

The low quality problem with primary research publications is not the writing but poor experimental design, misrepresenting experimental results, shoddy statistical analysis, and putting null results into file cabinets. Summarizing research findings isn't the crux of the problem, so if anything if an LLM can help the author perform a clearer and more concise writeup I'd see it as a net benefit.

Do any of the students have "custom instructions" set? Was this the first query to a brand new chat session?

> This means that OpenAI should be sued every single time someone manages to extract what is considered as copyrighted material from their software.

I agree! If GPT4 is outputting copyrighted material beyond what is considered fair-use (i.e. substantively more than what is provided by say, google books), I agree that is copyright infringement.

Indeed it is about the output, and making stuff available that people would otherwise have to pay for (or more precisely, enough of the copyrighted work that a person would have reason not to pay for the original work, causing a material loss to the original author) - that is a fineable violation imo.

Something else to think about... I work in biotech and have published articles in scientific journals on cellular and molecular level disease sequelae (such articles are also protected by copyright). Models trained on scientific literature are now being used for novel drug discovery and disease treatment pathways. These models are already outputting suggestions that seem very promising. Shall we also not provide these models access to the full corpus of scientific literature? It would significantly handicap these models to not have access to copyrighted scientific works. On one hand, some proportion of researchers will retain their jobs that would have otherwise been outsourced to LLMs (perhaps even myself). On the other hand, some amount of future patients will suffer or die from a disease that would have otherwise been cured.

Why didn't you just say that, instead of posing a hypothetical about software that may itself contain full book text which can be used to display (in this case fair-use) passages to end users? lol

I think the disconnect between your point of view and mine is that I see "training an LLM on copyrighted text" the same as a person reading copyrighted text, which is perfectly legal. And I see violating copyright as a person or LLM reproducing copyrighted work (illegal). But using other works as inspiration for something novel shouldn't be considered illegal, whether a person or LLM produced the work. I would even be fine with literature being treated more like music, where reproducing the essence of a piece of work (i.e. doesn't have to be a word for word reproduction) is considered a violation. But if the LLM creates something completely new, how is that a derivative work / infringement?

The article states the maximum penalty is $100k. Show me where it says otherwise and I'll believe you.

According to the article, $100k is the maximum penalty for ignoring this specific court order. Do you think the article is lying?

> Meta never claimed to be the champion of anonymity

Except in this _specific case_ the plaintiff asked Meta to remove the anon content and Meta said No.

Then the Judge asked Meta to provide the details of the anonymous user and "Meta argued that Facebook users should be able to express criticism, even if it is severe and anonymous."

I agree LLMs can make better spam. But good spam isn't real competition. It's not like anyone is debating whether they should buy the latest book from their favorite author or the latest book from their favorite author's clone LLM (which is known to have written some solid books). Again, this is an issue that needs to be solved by vendors (it seems like all they need is a system where authors get a copyright to their name, and can curate the list of titles published under their name).

It shows you a few pages if you are previewing the book (i.e. "look inside"). But if you are using search, it will show you where your search query shows up in the book, no matter what page the search query is found. This means you could theoretically search a book sentence by sentence, and it will eventually have shown you the entire book. I'm not claiming this is an efficient or practical way to game the system and read books, only that google books does contain the full copy of the book text and can reveal the contents of any passage. This is basically how Prosecraft works (at least what i glean from the article) - it doesn't let you read a whole book, even though it may contain a representation of the full text.

No, they don't provide the full book, just a few sentences before and after your search prompt (same as Prosecraft).

In both cases, however, if you had the patience, you could search the last few words of the text returned from your prior query and slowly work your way through the entire book.

Wrt. your link, the same thing could have happen to this author if these spam books contained complete gibberish (and someone listed it on Amazon/goodreads using the authors name). This isn't legitimate competition (i.e. books written by LLMs that rival the quality and style of the actual author). This is a failure of the selling platform to QC the books they are selling.