sushisource

Not the deepest topic, but:

Can someone explain to me why there seems to be such a high correlation between being high on the totem pole and lazy bits of written word? In this case, Sam can't be assed to bother with capital letters. For other people, it's abbreviations or some other unnecessary bit of laziness. I don't get it. In my experience the higher up you are in management the more you do this sort of thing.

The practical reason _is_ that it's fun and you like it. That could be enough.

I'm not too concerned about that being a reality in our lifetimes though.

I think this take is pretty BS. I'm not claiming sainthood or anything, but I don't drive like an insane person either, and every time I've driven a Tesla (which is at least semi often, my parents own one) it just goes HAM beeping at all sorts of shit, and it jerked the wheel weirdly on me at least once when it seemed to get terribly confused about what was actually a lane or not.

Moral of the story, the features are far from perfect, and I would prefer the number of times the car moves the wheel for me to be 0.

Heh, I put in "grapefruit" and it gave me just an absolute mess of like 100 grapefruit slices and then added a bunch of smoke over the top when it "removed the background".

Then I tried "day gecko" and the output absolutely rocked. So I guess my first try was unlucky.

Yeah. Comcast is shorting me by a solid 50Mb/s and this is the reason it's annoying. On top of the fact that their garbage excuse for a website is literally completely broken. Every time I've tried to use it for the past year it just sticks me in a login loop. What a truly miserable company.

Yeah, I also find that weird. I mean, don't get me wrong, I'd love to not have a car and I'm all for public transit/biking/walking, but I bought my car (which I love) - a brand new Focus ST for 28k in 2013. I spend maybe $3k a year on gas and maintenance, insurance etc, (I don't drive much) bringing TCO to ~6k range. If you have to drive a huge amount obviously that's not realistic but for a city like Seattle where you kinda need a car, but only for certain things, it's absolutely possible.

I don't think it's a _complete_ waste. It's better than it was before, but, it's absolutely true it could've been done much, much better than what we got.

The thing I've never really understood about this is... to what end? I get that, on a philosophical level, it sucks that in theory your privacy can be violated and that choice has been taken from you.

But on a practical level, that's just wildly unlikely to ever happen or ever have an impact on a normal person's life, so why stress about it?

Don't get me wrong, it's not to say we shouldn't advocate for govt. orgs not doing this sort of thing - but I also don't know why you'd spend so much time and mental energy trying to avoid a theoretical bogeyman.

I also find it consistently obnoxious that there is essentially no way to say "My driver was fine, but your platform did something stupid" when leaving feedback. At least, not without jumping through a million hoops. The arrogance of our industry is tiresome.

I took a ride in SF a while ago and it predicted a 3 minute pick up time which turned out to be 25 minutes - no fault of the driver, and the only way I could complain about this was to click through like 4 levels of "other issue" and then jump through hoops sending emails back and forth with support.

The problem with this whole thought process is it's hilariously abstract. The people in power have F-35s. What is your collection of (admittedly, unnecessarily powerful) guns going to do against that?

It also assumes that such disagreements require force to be resolved, and that's just demonstrably not always true. Even if it sometimes is.

I hope you got paid to write that. I switched from an Android to an iPhone recently and it is precisely 0% cooler or "more inspiring" than my old phone. I did it purely because password auto-fill appears to be marginally more reliable.

Not that Apple is a bad company or place to work or anything, but it also isn't some magic zen garden that will imbue all who work there with the power to change the world.

For 90%+ of the people who go to work there, it's a job, and the scenery changing that equation meaningfully seems like wishful thinking. It might be nice, but it's not going to radically alter your output.

This is more or less the plot of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prey_(novel)

And a number of other works. Not a terribly uncommon idea.

That's part of the reason I love running too. A minimum of fuss. It's funny that you mention rock climbing, because it's the same reason I love bouldering. You only need shoes. Climbing has something for everyone - trad for the gear heads, bouldering for the people who can't be bothered with planning, sport for people somewhere in the middle.

I consistently have issues with Prime failing to stream at 4k quality. Netflix works great typically.

The reference to crossing buttons not working I found particularly annoying because my experience here in Seattle is, except at the busiest intersections, you do in fact need to press the buttons, otherwise the crosswalk won't show the walking man for you, even if traffic is in fact stopped in the relevant direction. (Of course, the article points out this was meant to be only about NYC)

Particularly obnoxiously, if you are even a millisecond late in pressing the button (traffic just got the red light), you won't get the walking man until the next cycle.

Infuriating.

At this point I wish we had legislation requiring a "turn off AI bullshit" option for any camera. Every time I've taken a picture of myself using the camera app built-in to WhatsApp, it blurs the shit out of my face in an attempt to hide blemishes or whatever, and (in a weird sort of reverse-vanity) it really annoys me that it gives the impression I care about looking un-blemished, which I do not. AFAICT, there is no way to turn this off.

Thank you for this link! I, like a moron, kept looking on the play store for something and only saw garbage. Never thought to sideload.

The nagging in the android launcher has got more and more obnoxious recently. Half the time I open an app it asks if I want to "add it to my discover" with the only options being "yes" or "later". Infuriating.

You could've said the same thing about crocodiles 54 million years ago, but, hey, 54 million years later we've still got crocs.

It's a specious argument. Just because our species lifespan has been short until now doesn't mean anything about how long it will last from here out.

There are other, legitimate reasons to think maybe humans won't last very long, but, this certainly isn't one.

That's just not what the word purpose means. Take your example:

> If I start living in my van to renovate my house

Keyword here, "to". "To" imbues the purpose. If you then completely fail to actually do the renovation, sure, that's absolutely a problem, but the van's purpose was still to help you renovate the house. You just happened to fail at it. Intent matters, and the comment I replied to implies a whole lot of malicious intent that is more likely just incompetence or unpredictable outcomes. The difference is important in understanding how to address the issue.

What a completely absurd and nonsense take. Where does this "purpose" get decided? Some secret cabal that controls the education system? Insane.

There are some flaws in our education system that are likely the result of the fact that it is huge, serves an incredibly diverse set of people, and thus is a very complex and difficult to manage system.

There's no secret back room of evil people controlling the populace via an imperfect education system. What a weird take.

> And on a more prosaic note, Google's LaMDA is clearly ahead of ChatGPT (it's just not public), and explicitly tackles the bullshit/falsehood problem by having a second layer that fact-checks the LLM by querying a fact database / knowledge-graph.

Isn't that more-or-less what he's proposing, though? It does feel intuitive to me that something based on probabilistic outcomes (neural nets) would have a very hard time consistently returning accurate deterministic answers.

Of course (some) humans get there too, but that assumes what we're doing now with ML can ever reach human-brain level which is of course very much not an answered question.

DF's codebase is honestly the closed-source code I'm most interested in seeing.

My expectation is it's just an absolute mess, but I'm so curious.

I read this as "The earliest humans swam 100k, years ago"

I was ready to be _very_ impressed

How is this a meaningful retort to the other commenter? They get to use FF on iOS, you get to keep using Safari and every other stock app. What exactly is the problem there besides what comes across as some weird form of "keep the dirty Android users away from my iPhone"?

The theory would be that washes out in the noise. It's a simplification, but on average, most of the people most of the time are not doing that - why would it zone in on the rare case and apply that behavior?

This minimizes the main problem with really going full renewables, storage. Fusion is 24/7 output at the same level. Solar and wind are not, which means batteries, and all the problems associated with that.

Fusion could obviate the need for grid-wide storage systems which would be a huge advantage.

This really isn't accurate at all. I'm in very strong aerobic shape and 95% of my max heart rate is not at all sustainable for more than a few minutes, and it is also a deeply anaerobic activity. VO2Max != max heart rate. Your heartrate @ VO2 max is typically much lower than your max heartrate. Max genuinely means max in this case, as in, literally the highest you can get your heartrate up. By definition, you are way above your VO2 max in that situation and it is not going to be sustainable for long at all.

Something like 90% approaches what you're talking about, maybe being sustainable for 15 minutes or so, but that 5% makes an enormous difference.

I feel extremely targeted because I did exactly this with Blender recently

You should consider reducing the intensity and increasing the length of your cardio. You burn more fat at lower intensities. At high intensity, you burn exclusively carbs. Check out https://uesca.com/carbohydrate-vs-fat-burning-a-comprehensiv...

It's not quite that simple, obviously, but if your goal isn't to increase your running pace but rather just to stay in shape, I'd definitely consider running slower. If you run regularly, 150bpm indicates a moderate-high level of intensity (assuming you're not super young), rather than an easier pace which would consume more fat.

I find this richly ironic. One of the points of the article is that not everything is black and white, and we need to take a big picture view of things.

This sentiment is... exactly the opposite. It is completely possible for there to be problems in the media, and for there also to be content it produces that is good and makes sense.

Could the media be better? Sure. Does your almost comically negative comment really serve to help anyone? No.