valleyer

Definitely. I just feel like a boiling frog sometimes.

Right -- I'd already have thought places "couldn't" require people to be any kind of smartphone owner to participate in commerce, but I notice that more and more these days.

That just means the "regular" amount is higher than you think.

As relevant here, basically none of macOS development is outsourced/offshored.

Yeah, it sucks. Thanks for clarifying :(

The last Republican to balance the budget was Eisenhower. Yeah, Clinton is pretty old today too, but almost no one alive today was of voting age during the Eisenhower administration.

So, I agree with your conclusion.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSD

How are interest rates a function of joblessness? Do you mean inversely?

My amateur understanding is that prevailing interest rates are more directly a function of supply and demand for capital; I agree that higher prices increase demand for capital. Joblessness would seem to be correlated with lower demand; the unexpected combination of high employment and persistently low interest rates in the 2010s was a source of a lot of commentary, as I recall.

I don't feel like I "both sides"ed it that much, but I guess reasonable minds can disagree. But: neither party has balanced the federal budget, or even made (sane) noises about doing so, since the Democrats in the 90s. I haven't heard much about it from Democrats this election cycle -- perhaps reasonably so since there are much more critical issues at the moment.

Oy. I'm no fiscal conservative, but the US federal government absolutely needs to balance its budget. Otherwise, it's bound to either choke on interest payments, devalue the dollar, or both.

Unlike most Trumpists, I see the the problem as a revenue issue, not expenditures; unlike many non-Trumpists, I doubt "tax the rich" is going to be enough to plug the hole.

Government healthcare payments would be a good start -- it seems likely that the amount most employees already (effectively) pay for health insurance could fund equivalent government coverage with some money left over to help pay for other government expenses.

Your NIH is showing: usa.gov already existed

Evidently, you are in fact not "the semantics guy".

Because those countries do not control Anthropic's products.

They were not instructed to exploit HF; they did so to cheat on the task they were given.

I guess I missed that part of your comment or mistook it for "out-of-print"; yes, I agree that would be fine for out-of-copyright works. Sorry!

That's fair, and I agree a more wholesale policy could make more sense (though a government may still wish to limit some redistributed funds to being spendable only on things like college education, in which case you're approximately back in the same effective place). Bringing it back to the original topic, though, that sort of system is outside the remit of the Seattle city government, so I still think it makes sense for them to limit the rule's applicability. (It might not even be legal for them to apply it to universities anyway -- I don't know what Washington state delegates to cities in that way -- but that's orthogonal.)

Obviously, I think your second paragraph is an extreme overreaction; I have no stake in any university's profits, and I am not attempting to "emotionally manipulate" you.

At least in some cases, that would likely have the effect of making college education less accessible to poorer people. The richer people are currently subsidizing the poorer people; if you disallow that and have everyone pay the average, the richer students would pay less, but the poorer students would be priced out entirely. I think that would end up being a net negative for society.

(I agree the U.S. university pricing system as it stands is far from perfect.)

from the bill:

> “Algorithmic-based price discrimination” does not include:

> 5. The covered retailer offers a discounted price on equal terms to one of the following groups of consumers:

> c. Members, enrollees, or participants in a loyalty, membership, including cooperative memberships, or rewards program [...]

Because passing laws without limits is what leads to unintended consequences. For example, should algorithmic pricing of car insurance be banned? Should universities be banned from offering financial aid to lower-wealth students?

"because duh"? OpenAI et al. have extensive infrastructure for running the model on a different machine from the one the harness is being run on, because... that's their main product. I would be absolutely shocked if the model were being run on the same machine as the harness.

Which people? This leak was caused completely by private businesses.

Looked at another way, the lack of grace period was indeed a problem back then, and that's why the Obama government proposed and finalized a rule to solve that problem. And now the Trump government proposes to reimpose the problem.

Another bit of evidence exposing the lie that Trumpists only object to illegal immigration.

Couldn't they use frontier open-weight models from Chinese labs? The current Chinese government is friendly to them.

Seems like it would be shut down by an injunction almost immediately.

You can't expect me to stop selling crack to kids on the streets. My job is to feed my family.

Not in vi. :)

At least in the US, police don't enforce terms of service of private corporations. That's a civil matter, enforced by filing a lawsuit.

Keep in mind there may be a significant Pepsi Challenge effect at play here.

Yes, I too remember when Shaq starred in this commercial.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af0gtsjfy7E

Less space than a Nomad? Lame?