Alpha3031

And yet, somehow, not every country that has offered free ambulance rides has fallen into financial ruin.

For most nation states "should" in this case also corresponds to a certain treaty they are party to being highly inconsistent with treating health like a racket. Of course, the US is one of the few that never ratified said treaty. Too much like socialism I suppose.

Fairly sure most iGPUs these days are zero-copy and can dynamically allocate memory so what does "unified memory" mean to you exactly? A wider bus would be nice but it's not exactly a groundbreaking new invention.

OK yeah I can see how that would be a problem then lol.

Steering a single model towards that seems, again, technically challenging, especially if it needs to be obfuscated enough to pass code review (you are doing that for LLM code right?) and especially if targeted towards specific fields of use (e.g. critical infrastructure). I still don't see how the threat model could make sense here.

I think it's rather positive that Wikipedia editorial decisions are entirely independent of the foundation which accepts (and begs for) donations because nobody has to care about your decision not to donate.

It's not as if donations go to editors anyway, and there are plenty of the editor community who are rather more severe in their dislain for how the foundation conducts fundraising (I wouldn't say it's a majority, most probably don't care, but certainly a sizable minority) and would probably prefer you not donate anyway. On the other hand, I do think a majority of the community supports the policy of being resistant towards non-neutral outside coordination used to manipulate and undermine the integrity of internal decision making processes.

That doesn't make any sense. Model weights are literally just numbers you multiply by. To imply that it's any way even remotely comparable to the xzutils build process is...

Well, I would be very technically impressed if someone managed to achieve any form of code execution, especially given unknown levels of quantisation post-release whereas xzutils was interesting mostly due to obfuscation.

I feel like when they decided the model was "too woke" so it would be a good idea to make it "MechaHitler" was when the not making it political ship sailed.

I will not concede that it is at all "subjective" what being disruptive means in the specific case of your intentionally bad-faith trolling. You may choose to categorise that either as an obvious case or refer to my previous comments.

Well, as I understand it, SpaceX intends to continue to raise money from the market. Eventually the true believers will stop having money to give them.

Romans used lead utensils, I don't think that was due to cost.

Assuming good faith is not a suicide pact. If you consistently aim to disrupt the project then you obviously should be CBANed. I can't comment on the evidence available in your block discussion, only what you've presented here.

You've openly stated that you were intentionally acting in bad faith, hounding other editors to provoke them and doing so while logged out to evade scrutiny. Retreating to "you can't prove I did anything wrong" is not the defense you think it is.

Wikipedia is very explicitly not a indiscriminate database of everything,[1] and dismissing anyone in the editing community who attempts curate it as CensorshipBros is the same type of twitter bullshitting called out by the blog post in the OP.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:What_Wi...

> I use to play this game where I gently rub as many established users as possible the wrong way.

> I do this as an IP editor as I've seen them fabricate excuses to ban users often enough.

You know there's no need to fabricate an excuse to indefinitely block someone for trolling right?

Not really that important but I think the latter is more commonly referred to as "freedom from" rather than "freedom of"? I'm not 100% sure if I parsed that correctly.

Do you mean WS-19? It gives 2023 as the production date for WS-15, which is in the past.

I feel like the problem is more easily solved by adding a chronological view or filtering to an existing tree-based discussion (which RES can do for old.reddit) than attempting to automatically sort a discussion into subtopics.

Many chronological forum software also can already display reply/replied-to chains (though perhaps not first-class in terms of UX) if people use the reply function, which is often an option.

Phased rollout over a month according to announcement (via ArsTechnica: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/06/reddit-will-require-..., Wayback Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20260630180024/https://old.reddi...) so not everyone will be blocked yet.

Things on earth don't move at 8 km/s so understandably less worries about collisions there.

Income-wise difference is significantly less when adjusted for PPP, and (this is from a decade ago but I can't find anything much more recent that goes into comparing countries) Jones and Klenow (2016) says:

> Average Western European living standards appear much closer to those in the United States (around 85 percent for welfare versus 67 percent for income) when we take into account Europe’s longer life expectancy, addi- tional leisure time, and lower inequality.

Jones, Charles I.; Klenow, Peter J. (September 2016). "Beyond GDP? Welfare across Countries and Time". American Economic Review. *106* (9): 2426–2457. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20110236. ISSN 0002-8282. S2CID 1352951.

I don't think you are engaging in the discussion in good faith.

I assume by OP you mean chipotle_coyote, which, reading their comment again, does not propose any specific policies and in fact explicitly disclaims knowing the specific best policy for the policy outcomes that they desire, which is anything that adresses the level of wealth inequality we currently have.

It's a bit hard to answer the "dirtiest fuel you can find" case specifically, because there are a number of areas where EVs are more efficient. The biggest difference is probably the fact that the internal combustion engine in a car is about 25% efficient, though it depends on the RPM it is running at etc (the reason hybrids can push it up to ~40-ish% depending on how new they are is because the engine is always running at the most efficient RPM when it runs), but the "dirtiest power" specifically would probably be a coal plant which is only about 30% to 40% efficient (9000 to 11000 BTU/kWh in imperial units) due to low temperatures and the inability to run it as a 2-stage, combined-cycle sort of setup (modern combined-cycle gas turbines are ~60% efficient which is one contributing factor to gas-based electricity being cheaper even though gas costs more per GJ, though since the price of natural gas is quite volatile that sometimes changes). Of course the transportation is different depending on which fuel is used for a power plant.

In the worst-case scenario, accounting for the ~90% efficiency of the electric motors... Well, Xunmin et al. (2005) estimates 3–36%, so lifecycle emissions could be reduced by as little as 3% if you power it 100% by coal, which would be less than the what you'd get from a hybrid, but... You're not really going to find a power grid that is powered 100% by coal these days, even in China. Really the biggest advantage of a BEV, and any other electrification, is that if there are future investments in the grid (and there will be since generators don't last forever) you don't have to replace the engine of your car for it to automatically reduce emissions. The efficiency gains are just a cherry on top.

[Xunmin]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S17505...

Hmm, would it be possible to avoid it by using no SIM in the device and WiFi/VoIP only (whether mobile hotspot or some fixed internet)? It would mean an extra device to carry around but if country detection by native apps is in your threat model...

I would posit that it may be because of your statement in your previous comment about "something they can't control" and it is possible the person replying to you finds it relevant whether who their partners are is something they could control, which is consistent with a literal reading of their question, asking whether they can't control who their partners are.

Sure, I don't doubt that Tesla, Inc probably could have bankrupted itself without really producing anything at scale if Eberhard didn't get forced out, especially given the GFC happening at the same time, and it really sucks that legacy automakers weren't willing to sell the EVs they were perfectly capable of designing producing at the time, even if they were forced to, until someone else did it and showed there was a market for it. I still find the hype around Musk bothersome though.

I don't really care to advocate much for wealth taxes since I don't particularly like them over other options. I just don't think imposing wealth taxes (even if they're progressive to the point that it's higher than the average growth rate of, e.g., equities, or maybe even just the risk-free rate when wealth is in the billions) is something that ought to be considered "how dictatorships work".

So you know, agree to disagree, I'm not going to argue anything other than that I don't particularly care for the framing of it as dictatorial or mob rule because the same can be done for other taxes. Which I have done and it doesn't appear you wish to dispute anyway.

Most of the rah rah billionaires shouldn't be allowed people are just proposing a wealth tax from what I've been told. If I'm wrong I'm open to hearing about it.

It would seem quite an essential liberty for a democratic polity to be able to impose this thing called "taxes". I suppose it's up to you to decide whether that is compatible with the rule of law and property rights.