corethree

This is a horrible direction to start off. Especially given that we can't truly tell if an image is AI generated or not. What if I modify an AI generated image?

There's so many technicalities here that can be weaponized.

It's no different really. It's just the volume of manga is much more higher and diverse then American comics. She can't really know if she's interested if she hasn't tried it.

Though I will say manga does have it's cliche tropes the same way American comics do it with super heroes. If she picks the wrong book she can easily be turned off.

I'm not talking about a dichotomy between fantasy. My comment still applies to that.

This is what I'm talking about:

   "Set in an alternate history Cairo, Shubeik Lubeik/Your Wish Is My Command is a sci-fi character drama built around intricate character portraits set in a ‘post-colonial’ context, wherein we see people from a variety of backgrounds wrestle with life."

Like this slice of life, complex character studies where the story is pretty mundane that's so common in lit. The setting can still be sci-fi.

Anyway he made a subtle slight against super hero stuff in his intro. My comment was more (though not exclusively) referring to the dichotomy between super hero stuff and other comics. My argument is that it's better then these books he's recommending due to the sheer man power and talent it took to create the MCU. The culmination of work from technology and talent built by thousands of people and he derides it because it's "popular".

Like literally what was the point of that intro? To randomly mention how popular super hero stuff is and to dismiss it in all his recommendations. It's the definition of snobbery.

Oh man. Manga has been honed over decades to be artfully escapist. The Japanese have this stuff down as an engineered art form and they divided it by gender too.

As a dude I recommend stuff like, great teacher onizuka or Naruto or attack on titan or full metal alchemist... but that's stuff engineered for men.

For girls you'll have to Google but it's definitely a targeted genre as well with tons of long running mangas.

I think that's a coincidence.

What gets me more is that he just selected stuff that's snobbish and "intellectual."

It's so strange that people are like this that they find hard to digest stories about ultra realistic and deep characters in ultra realistic mundane situations to be called "literature."

It requires more skill and more intelligence to create an elegantly simple escapist stories about unrealistic situations and characters that speak to a combination of realism and idealism .

All of these books can't hold a candle to the MCU up to avengers end game. 10 years of movies with multitudes of artists, story tellers and centuries of technology all coordinated and artfully put together to build a monument of story telling only to be dismissed by snobs for being "stupid".

Instead these snobs worship these slice of life books (often with shitty low effort art) about some character overcoming racism or coming to terms with his or her identity/parent/partner/son. These archetypical story types you find in literature are just as formulaic as the escapist stories we see in genres like super hero stories or star wars or lore, etc..

Make no mistake. We all have preferences but the more intelligent genre is the one with more escapism, unrealistic situations with semi realistic characters. Because these stories are harder to pull off, they are harder to make for the big screen.

People who don't understand this just aren't getting it.

China did this because of terrorism. It was reactionary.

It's not far off from what the US did in Guantanamo.

Right but a lot of the reporting in the US isn't done to serve business interests. There is something else at play here.

Litigation and defamation is probably one aspect of the control.

No there's huge drive to do this in china. They are obviously inferior at it as of right now.

But that won't last.

This is already inevitable. China is on a mad rush to gain technological independence. They've already succeeded with in most industries and semiconductors and aviation are two of a small amount that remain temporarily out of China's grasp.

Anything that senator does won't change the trendline of the inevitable.

People who live in the US are usually less aware of how a lot of the international community perceives them as a bully. His view is very common and he finds it completely foreign that the US is even perceived this way.

A lot of people in the US view the US as the heroic peace keeper, and that all actions the US takes against China are for "world security" rather then an attempt to keep the top spot as the #1 economic and military super power.

It's weird because while there is freedom of the press in the US, many US citizens are still strangely misinformed and irrationally patriotic.

I'm not even clear about the mechanism at work here but there is a sort of strange form of control of information at play here. You can sort of sense it in US news. It's genius really how the media can be controlled despite amendments in place ensuring freedom of the press.

>Instead, the article (ironically) appears to be written from the biased standpoint that it "ought to be" so

This attitude is pervasive in the US due to the history of violence, enslavement and segregation against other races. The Chinese, African American and Japanese have all been victims of such crimes in the US.

Internationally the biggest culprit that comes to mind is the systematic slaughter and extermination of the Jewish people aka the holocaust.

Thus what you see in modern society is an over correction. In attempt to get away from one extreme we've headed towards our objective and over shot it like a control system overshooting equilibrium. Assuming "diversity" as a default without scientific basis isn't even the extreme I'm talking about here, we're shooting way past that.

But you see what your post implies right? Yes it's scientifically valid to ask whether diversity is good or bad. Yes it's very possible to find out via science that diversity is bad. But the consequences of such knowledge, means a valid utilization of segregation enforced on the basis of science.

Right? Imagine kicking all black people out of a white neighborhood based off of valid and real science about how diversity is bad. Questioning diversity is scientifically valid and a negative conclusion against diversity is a realistic possible truth we may not want to face. Anyway, I digress... I mentioned we overshot the whole diversity question right?

We can all probably agree that it's not good to segregate based off of race. But should we segregate people who identify as a wolves or penguins? https://www.lgbtqia.wiki/wiki/Therian_system

Where is the line drawn? Allowing a transgender female to compete in female sports? Or allowing someone who identifies as a turtle to fly a passenger airplane? When does "diversity" cross the line into scientific absurdity? When should it be classified as insane? That's the big question here and modern society is at a point where all of this is blurry and not obvious yet.

Literally I posted a link to a website that lists "therian" as a formal scientific concept. We've definitely overshot here.

This article is likely on the front page because a lot of programmers like to think they're smart and at the same time never attended university.

More women are attending college than ever before. In fact more women total are in higher education then men.

I'm not spelling out what that means here but this study reflects what you choose it to reflect and that's not always good. Or maybe it is... again depending on your perspective.. and your gender.

This study is also too general. Some universities that are selective and actually have higher IQ students.

Attending university is useful for making friends?

That's not what I would classify as useful. You can get friend from many many places. Attending university for friends is not a valid reason to attend imo.

I believe a similar research study was done on HN where they asked HN people what their IQ was and actually measured it.

I vaguely recall the average guessed IQ was 120 or 130 while the actual IQ was around 100 which is similar to this study. In a nutshell the conclusion was that people on HN like to think they're smarter than average and like to up vote articles on IQ when in reality HNers are just average.

I can't find the study anymore. But I remember seeing it somewhere.

It usually isn't. They're right. They benefit usually because of a name brand school. The name brand is the benefit, the education less so.

What people do on the job has overwhelmingly no relation to what they learned in school. Only like at most 5 percent applies in most cases.

Because the circumstance is different. China also did not do this before. I'm more talking about embargo on the entire US via china. China can still trade with the rest of the world.

wishful thinking and a bit too biased towards patriotism. I'm looking for realistic answers here.

Times change. A typical Chinese metropolis completely dwarfs hong Kong. That's why China was willing to back pedal on the autonomy deal for hong Kong because its no longer means much as an economic powerhouse. Almost every other Chinese city has left it in the dust.

You know this, but a lot of people are just behind on the current economic reality. Not surprising given the speed at which china moves.

National security is the cover story. The real story is about economic power.

The world is different now.

Most of the manufacturing capabilities of the US has completely shifted over to china. So there would be damage to everyone now. I'm just asking about the extent of the damage. Is survival possible?

Also I'm not saying ban all trade. Just ban all trade with the US. This would be the retaliatory tactic as that's where the pressure is coming from as china is directly challenging the US for the top spot in the economic hierarchy.

Hypothetical question... if China banned all trade with the US what would happen to the US? And what would happen to china?

This site is American and thus patriotism plays a heavy role in the bias of comments. Usually, China is by default viewed in a negative light.

It blinds people to the obvious fact that the US is heavily using anti free market tactics to end globalism while China is not acting as the aggressor here.

People won't put it aside man. If you don't know why then you don't understand people.

You got it backwards. Think critically.

If it was Justin Bieber themed only the Justin Bieber fans wouldn't perish.

Would you download a Justin Bieber natural disaster app? If the answer is yes then this conversation is over.

It doesn't. First off it gets the wrong people to download the app. Second the right people will be turned off from downloading it.

Because it's strange and distracting? Is this a promotional app or an actual earth quake app?

Imagine this: Star Trek the next generation Earthquake Locator! and it's an Lcars interface.

Additionally Eva was a very divisive series. Popular yes, somewhat main stream in japan but also strange enough that its mostly liked by a certain crowd. I'm part of that crowd but at the same time I get why that crowd is different.

To help illustrate imagine 2010s Justin Beiber or Twilight themed earth quake apps. Right? That's sort of a different crowd from the people who like Eva and not everyone is into that stuff. Are you more likely to download the app if it was themed liked that?

Additionally Anime was not always mainstream in the world. It was considered nerdy to like it. It's become mainstream now in the last decade outside of japan, but in japan it's still considered a little different.

The UI/UX graphic design from Evangelion is actually pretty cool and clean. The only other sci-fu UI design I've seen that is also clean and nice looking is from star trek the next generation. Actually they made the UI from star trek better with Picard.

Borrowing the name from Eva might be a bit much in this case but borrowing the UI look won't be. They've done both here. They could've even gotten away with borrowing the graphic design look from Eva without citing it as the Eva UI designs are generic enough that it's not an obvious copy.

Examples:

eva: https://medium.com/astromono/the-amazing-ui-design-of-evange...

lcars: https://www.thelcars.com/themes/lcars-ultra-picard.html

>Hahaha, SMH. I don’t need to prove anything,

Then why are you communicating with me? Isn't your goal to convince me? If not why are you wasting your time? My goal is to show you how wrong you are, so I'm not wasting my time. I think I'm failing in this regard because you're just unable to admit it.

>I was making a statement about doing operations like multiply on fp32 digital values from the start, responding directly to your statements 8 comments up. You’re losing your own topics, and you seem to be unable to actually hear or understand what I’m saying for some reason, because you keep repeating your own separate straw man over and over and over.

I'm not responding to that statement. I'm responding to your comment on repeatability. You REFRENCED me directly in that statement so I am responding to it. Look at the chain:

   YOU: Digital fp8 might be repeatable where analog isn’t, but that doesn’t necessarily make it more accurate, nor is it something we characterize as “exact” like @corethree was claiming.

   ME: Anyway, repeatable and exact are sort of similar concepts. If I can repeat a number that means I can replicate it, exactly. Hence the term exact.

   ME: I also never said digital fp8 is more accurate or exact. There's no such thing as "digital fp8" or "analog fp8" it makes no sense. Digital and analog are orthogonal concepts to floating point. I said electrical analog devices cannot precisely represent a ONE. Simply because you cannot remove all the noise from an analog signal to make it a perfect ONE. To help you understand, instead of floating point, think of an INT8. An an analog computer cannot represent the exact instance of an INT8 in the same way a digital one can.

   YOU: Oh my, no. Exact number is a term that makes a statement about precision and error, and repeatable is not. They are orthogonal terms.

   ME: Oh my yes. The action of "repeating" 100 percent requires the ability to create an exact number. Why don't you try it repeating a 1v value in a circuit where exact numbers can't be made. Your claim simply isn't in line with reality.

   YOU: I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here. When you multiply two fp32 values, and the result is rounded, the answer is not exact, even if the inputs were.

   ME: I'm not talking about two fp32 values. I'm not talking about multiplying. I'm talking about repeating a value. If a wire was once 2.1234 volts, I turn it off, can i replicate the 2.1234 volts again exactly? No. There's noise. Repeating is NOT multiplying.

Read this chain. It looks like there's two flaws with your logic here. First you don't understand what the word repeatability means. You seem to think it's only associated with multiplication of fp32 and you referenced me into making that claim in your INITIAL comment.

Second, if I can't apply repeatability to a single value, then it is NOT applicable to fp32 multiplication. Floating point is simply not commutative or associative. If the elements are added in the exact same order you CAN repeat the result. But if all these elements are noisy analog values then you can never repeat the results EVEN if the order is repeated.

Essentially the logic here still applies EVEN when you mistakenly think repeatability is some phenomenon only attributed to floating point.

So in conclusion two mistakes made exclusively by you. Failure to understand the meaning of "repeatability." And failure to understand the nature of repeatability in the context of floating point in that it's actually an algebraic issue where it lacks associativity and commutativity.

>I’ve listed multiple types of processors in active development and maybe a dozen companies making them, and you’re commenting on the article for one of them. If you think that nothing mentioned in this thread so far is “legit”, then it seems... nevermind. Pretty strong claims for someone who didn’t know that FPAAs exist...

First.. me not knowing about FPAAs is orthogonal to my point. I'm still right and you're still wrong. Comments like this lend zero support for your argument.

Basically let me illustrate to you what "legit" means. First the application can't be about better performance and energy efficiency. I caveated the FIRST sentence in this thread saying energy and speed were the only practical use cases, so you presenting such examples would be REDUNDANT to my point and useless to your counter.

That leaves but one application: Some practical usage that analog computing can do that digital can't. You've presented no example that fits this use case. So overall the conclusion here is that you're wrong.

I could be wrong. Perhaps you did present such an example and I missed it. If that is the case it would help convince me if you emphasized and elaborated on those specific examples. But you should only do this if your goal is to convince me that you're not wrong. If that's not your goal, then I suggest you just leave and not respond as you would be wasting your own time here if you're responding to me without the goal of convincing me. If that's the case, then you have wasted your time on this entire conversation.

No they digitize the signal to get the modulos. Look at the diagram.

It's not relevant because there are digital operations need to get the final result BEFORE they do the final ADC conversion. It's like saying analog transistors are used to make digital gates therefore are all computers with gates are analog.

They are talking about an analog MVM in a system that is doing hybrid computations both digitally and with analog systems. It completely fails to support your point of increasing precision in an analog computer with multiple analog signals. It's basically the same thing as using one analog signal per digit instead they're using one signal per modulo.