darksaints

All I had to see to know what Flock stands for was a video of the CEO calling people terrorists for opposing Flock.

Why do we let narcissists run so much of our world?

Not only that, but the fires can burn hot enough to melt the asphalt, and at high enough temperatures the bitumen in the asphalt will vaporize and feed the flames.

Yeah, I’d say the only thing that deserves classification would be weapon technical designs (but not existence/purpose), and maybe short term operational details for law enforcement or military planned actions.

Yes

I'm increasingly of the opinion that state secret classification of our law enforcement systems should only exist for a year max. We've abused the system to shield evil people from accountability and to hide evil actions by our government, and that has to change.

Well they’re the ones that cost the most money!

Hilarious that you believe words that come out of Musk’s mouth. How embarrassing.

I think you probably meant Andrew Carnegie

About 80% of my software engineering job is bugging overseas contractors to finish work on my ticket requests.

Are you running with this port because of the slowness that Truck has had in merging new code from outside contributors? It seems like that was the reason for the MonsterTruck fork of Truck, which also has some promising features that aren't present in Truck.

Personally, I've been planning out work to create a build123d-like python scripting environment which wraps the Truck kernel, in the hopes that one day Truck will be mature enough (so many problems with fillets!) to surpass OpenCASCADE.

As much as I hate Design By Committee, a CAD kernel is a massive undertaking and it would be nice to not have 20 different projects all working on cool features that are not compatible with others because every project took its own path. It might be worth finding others actively working in this space and see if there could be a shared vision that we could all work towards together. Things like fillets, solutions to the topological naming problem, etc., are gonna take a lot of smart minds working together to really solve.

I'd gladly shell out a bunch of tokens to help create that vision, but I'd have to say I'm not exactly the person to architect that vision myself.

https://crates.io/crates/monstertruck

Just because surveillance capitalism and hyper-targeted advertising are the ways that some companies subsidize their loss leaders does not mean that it is the only way.

Also, the value that companies like Facebook bring to the world is negative, and the fact that it is free only makes it worse.

> Public shame and malice towards individuals who violate expected norms is actually a fairly good deterrent toward would-be bad actors. I'm sure there are many millions of instances per day where people decide not to do untoward things because they care about their reputations

I do agree for most people. But the problem is that the worst people have no shame. People like Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg, etc., used to try to fake humility and act like normal people, but that ship has sailed and now they seem to take glee in acting like shitbags and getting away with it. Which is why we need laws.

> Argon agents are working on migrating C/C++ codebases to Rust across Google

If anybody at google is reading this, please please pretty please prioritize or-tools. I absolutely love the project and use it all the time, but for the entire life of the project they've never had a repeatable working build system, and the whole SWIG framework is a nightmare to deal with. There's so much potential as an open source project, and a lot of external researchers would love to contribute, but the codebase is an example of everything wrong with the C++ ecosystem.

All opposition to Trump's lame ideas are treason. At this point, I've committed treason 134 times. What's one more?

No it won't.

See? I can make unsubstantiated sweeping claims too.

I've been thinking about this a lot lately, because I've noticed a trend in my own life that has happened countless times: I have a tendency to look at problems that others in different fields have found difficult to solve, and think I have a great idea that could change that field. And then I push to develop my solution to that problem, run into real world problems with my solution, refine and adapt, try a different solution, run in a loop until I settle on the fact that the people who are in those fields also have great ideas, they just are more aware of the constraints and that's the reason why the hard problems don't have easy solutions.

There is an absolutely enormous amount of hubris to being an engineer. I don't necessarily think its a bad thing...a certain amount of hubris is necessary for progress to be made. Our minds are creative and we can come up with amazing things, but something in there always makes us think we can do it better than the people who are stuck doing it daily. We fool ourselves into thinking they're too stuck in their mindset to have a more creative solution.

And the funny thing about LLMs is that while they can enable our competence, they enable our hubris even more.

Delivery at an exact time is of course a constraint, but I’ve never seen any sort of constraint on the exact fuel usage. This isn’t anything like aviation where excess fuel has to be dumped in order to land safely. If you don’t use the fuel for your voyage, you just fill up less for your next voyage. Weight effects are countered via water ballast, as they always have been.

And sails for power augmentation do not complicate timelines at all. If there’s not enough wind, you use more fuel. Nobody has meaningfully proposed relying 100% on wind propulsion.

As both a sailor and a wingsail designer, I've followed this space for a long time. I've gotta say this is just one of the thousands of trial PR announcements for different companies which develop something and think it's gonna save the world.

https://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html

We've been seeing these every other year or so ever since the walker wingsail back in the mid 80's:

https://www.change-climate.com/Transport_Land_Sea_Sustainabl...

As to why they are never successful, I don't exactly know. Most of the companies that put these on trial just quietly retire them without adoption, and never explain why. It's not about ease of use, plenty of designs have near 100% automation and simple design. It's not really about maintenance, plenty of designs have almost maintenance-free design as well.

My best guess is that sails/wingsails/rotorsails have inherent height, which interferes with bridges and gantry cranes, and requires furling/stowing capabilities which them makes the systems a lot more complex. My next best guess is that in order to get meaningful propulsion, you introduce heeling, which is bad for container ships and potentially catastrophic for dry bulk.

Okay, so it doesn't output text, that much is understood. What are the inputs like? I'm assuming maybe a text input? maybe an AST definition? Really hard to tell how this works at all from the demos, especially since we can't really try it out.

I'd love to see a democratic presidential candidate who vows to openly exploit all of the illegal powers that Trump did, but in a way that hurts republicans and red states, and vow to continue doing it until constitutional amendments are passed to prevent it. Republicans would jump on board because they have no real ideology that they aren't willing to abandon for more power, and democrats would reluctantly be forced to do it because they care so much about being seen as hypocrites. Maybe a silly and potentially dangerous way to solve the problem, but at this point I'd try anything.

relevant username lol. I tend to agree though...establishment democrats are a major problem for americans who want to be free of the problems that trump brought to us. Their only complaint about him seems to be that he's on the wrong team and has poor decorum. That's why so much emphasis has been placed on electing non-establishment democrats this time around. But the establishment is pro-corporate and pro-israel and they have all the money.

Also a weightlifter (masters olympic weightlifting, nationally ranked). TRT and steroids are actually the opposite. Once you go off of them, your body starts to revert, muscle mass is lost, and often by more than you started with (because the body's natural production rates change with supplementation). It does take time, which is why sports regulatory bodies typically require specific time periods of hormonal therapy before they can participate, but their bodies will eventually adjust.

Sports regulatory bodies still test for hormonal PED, but their concerns have long swayed away from them because of the fact that they are so easy to detect and have the built in disadvantage of potentially altering your life negatively outside of sport. The current concerns have shifted to peptides and other forms of PEDs, because they are much harder to detect because they are 1) often naturally occurring but in smaller quantities, 2) don't actually directly act on the musculoskeletal system, but rather trigger natural processes that act on the system, and 3) often have half-lives dramatically shorter than most drug tests can even account for, and therefore require near continuous monitoring.

When a coup fails, that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I'm pretty confident in asserting that no industry in the history of industry has ever gone from birth to full regulatory capture faster than the AI industry has.

I think keeping models around for a defined period of time is fine, but fracturing your model offerings like that (keeping around multiple versions of the same model) is very hard to do economically. The economics of the AI ecosystem are dominated by queueing theory constraints that make it extremely cheap to serve predictable traffic loads, and extremely expensive to serve unpredictable loads, and any time you split your offerings like that, you make both less predictable and therefore more expensive to serve both versions.

If I were paying anthropic prices, I'd expect it, but Deepseek is a super scrappy upstart in comparison and intentionally arbitraging on price. I would never expect them to do that.

Based on what passes for “engagement” and “content” on their platforms, I’d estimate that a majority of their users are exactly that.

$295 one time permanent license with free upgrades and can be migrated between different computers?

I don't have a single reason to do any form of video editing, let alone professional video editing, but that kind of pricing model makes me want to buy a license just to make sure that companies like this stick around.

Yeah this was my experience too. I have an undergrad business degree, but got nerd sniped by an optimization problem, found a solution with constraint programming, and ended up going down a 15 year operations research rabbit hole with it.

Many people say that the way to tackle a hard problem is to break it down into smaller problems. I disagree. The best way to tackle a hard problem is to break it down into a defined search space and as many seemingly-redundant constraints as you can possibly list, then dump it all into a solver, go take a nap for a few hours or possibly a month, then come back to the problem solved for you.

With hiring from management consulting companies coming in a close second place.