SpaceManNabs

I am not denying the existence of the legal definition. I am saying that the contrast with the public expectation is because the legal definition is a sort of regulatory capture. You are debating with an irrelevant point that only you brought up.

> If you don't want to go to jail or be fined, don't commit the crime, no matter how convenient or easy it seems to be.

This in particular

> If the only thing stopping you from doing a crime is easy access, and a cop provides you that access, and you commit the crime, you were in the wrong.

If you don't see how this is different from the example above, then I can see you are bringing up irrelevant points.

yes because the legal definition is intentionally narrow and nearly toothless. not the fault of anyone but legislators and lawyers.

This was an issue when people were discussing unity per install fees.

How well does the EU respond to malicious compliance?

I haven't done visualizations for data on frontend in a decade, but when I looked at this space, the most popular tool was d3.js without much lock-in.

Not sure if that is the case anymore.

Previous discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38704982

Links are different though.

This link is to arxiv. The one in the discussion I link is to some hugging face papers reference.

We cannot confirm Big Bang theory until we figure out inflation more.

Always a bigger fish that can drag things in court to their advantage

So apple can play appeal games to keep the watch sales going and then just redesign a new watch? and if the appeals determine apple was actually in the wrong, they don't have to pay anything?

Kinda absurd lol. The US court system is so biased towards rich transgressors lmao.

Well, tbf to apple, no domestic court has ruled on this patent. Just domestic agencies and the ITC right?

> And nothing is competitive with GPT-4 right now.

You mean nothing available? Or you mean nothing that public knows exists? The answers to those two questions are different. There are definitely products that aren't available but the public knows exist and are upcoming that are in GPT-4's ballpark.

Why was this downvoted? It didn't answer the question, but it showed that there is a sort of imprint that GP was asking about.

And it saves everyone a tab's worth of effort.

> I've never heard anyone promote frequentist statistics

I will do it:

1. Computationally easier

2. often analytical theory available for most use cases so interpretability is high

3. more literature available so you can get unstuck faster if you mess up

4. no accusations of subjective bias in your prior (the con is clear, no ability to leverage subjective expertise)

5. In the asymptotic regime, MLE and bayesian MAP often converge anyways

6. king of hypothesis testing

For most people, it doesn't matter. It matters when you are doing treatment for small sample sizes or other situations that would cause low power.

Read the username. I am not the whatsapp user lol.

Btw, Poe's law, and you are absolutely right about Europe lol. Thank you for making my point.

> But no one is training these kinds of models on their personal device

on-device transfer learning/fine tuning is def a thing for privacy and data federation reasons. Part of the reason why model distillation was so hot a few years ago.

Is this similar to subset selection with the concrete distribution?

How is this different from flash attention? I think using similar terms without explaining the difference in the abstract is confusing...

edit: Seems like this is an extension along two different mechanisms within the flash framework. Title of paper could be better, but it is within the first few pages.

is there an arxiv paper on how they went from 1 to 2? or any other details?

This seems completely overkill.

I don't even like having to clear my history and wtv regularly. I use incognito mode most times.

Now I have monitor what my local AI collects?

"through the lens of privacy" my ass, man.

Why would I ask my browser what the meaning of a life well lived is?

What exactly was breached isn't clear... Very worrying

I am surprised my statement was so controversial tbh. It is exceedingly obvious if you talk to hot women lol, and they are pretty much are what determines how mainstream people are going to talk to each other.

doesn't matter why

This attitude is exactly what I was talking about!

american iphone users just want others to be iphone users

> Why the heck should I care about my friends and family paying some “Apple status” fee to get an iPhone just so I can share pictures and videos with them?

You might not. It is clear that the majority of iphone users don't care that android users keep complaining about green vs blue bubbles.

> Where is the data proclaiming this?

Use the mobile app usage data repository that your company provides or wtv data subscription (Bloomberg, data.ai, etc) that your company provides. After looking at aggregate, segment by iOS vs android. Hell, if you work in the mobile app space, you already know just how difficult it is to get iOS users to shift away from the apple default.

> I don’t know where you’re getting these ideas from.

like i said, techie vs normie divide. Funny you keep mentioning anecdotes when we can clearly look at the market forces. Apple isn't being pressured to change anything because their users just find it easier for others to switch to iPhone.

As others have remarked, my perspective is US-centric.

> I’ve never personally met somebody that cares what brand of phone you have.

This is incorrect, or you don't meet many people. They exist.

Ye you are probably right that I am american-centric in my perspective. Only one that really matters in tech tho.

Percentage share of iphones are rising in korea and japan tho for similar reasons though.

The technie vs normie divide exemplified right here in these comments.

You don't hear iPhone users begging their friends to get on signal unless they are discussing drugs or sensitive topics. You hear android users ask iphone users to install wtv app all the time.

And I am talking about anecdotes here, but there are well-document events (some that happened this year) that do emphasize what I am saying. I won't share them though because you know... jobs... and that they should be obvious if you are following this conversation over the past decade. What I will say tho is that only one company wants (wants being generous) the other to change their messaging.

> The fact that it can be simple to share high fidelity pictures and videos, but it isn’t just because Apple wants their walled garden benefits nobody but Apple

Irrelevant. iPhone users mostly just want android users to get iphones. Doesn't matter why.

> iPhone customers desperately want to be able to chat together

is also laughably false lol. iPhone users just want android users to get an iphone.

The PS5 and its games have great accessibility settings. No more fears of developing carpal tunnel for me.

I didn’t realize signal was so secure. Is this common to ga even post quantum guarantees?

You should open the article. The very first content in the article is someone praising critique and also saying they wont use bazel.

What is wrong with bazel?