grumbelbart2

This is called metamerism. It can be a practical issue if two pigments have the same color under one light source, but a different one under another. You want your artificial teeth to have the same color as your real teeth in sunlight, led light, and a classic lightbulb for example.

Overly specific and not more than feel-good blurb. “When you’re recording” - what if they record it for, say, debugging purposes? Are images send into the cloud even if that light is off? “Prioritize” on-device processing is a meaningless promise, on the contrary - it means that some things will not be done on device. There is nothing in this text stopping them from streaming and storing whatever they want and need.

There is a static branch predictor that is used if there is no statistic on a branching instruction yet, and it's really simple: Jumps backward are assumed to be taken (they usually are from a loop), jumps forward are assumed to be not taken.

So the jump that forms the loop will be predicted correctly for all executions but the very last (when the loop ends).

They are "more" vertical, but they too have vital suppliers that they could not do without. The semiconductor supply chain is deep. Everybody knows ASML, but there are countless others that produce raw wafers, etching machines, special chemicals and so forth.

And also since they don't bite, they won't compete for the same resources / food.

> This motionless destination “without difference”, is also known as heat death, or entropy.

This is BTW not how the heat death would look like. There would still be fluctuations that would, given infinite time, produce almost anything by chance at some point.

This is what the Boltzmann brain is all about: If the universe goes down that path, it is much more likely that what we experience is just a hallucination of a "brain" that spun into existence by chance, rather than all of this being a "real" universe. It's the precursor of the simulation question.

From what I understand, on x86 Linux stores a thread-local pointer to its TLS block in %fs. Could that simply be re-used?

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.arch/c/IT2dhS4q2M8?pli=1

Isn't the question more an economic one: Is it cheaper to put some solar cells into the desert and to buy some batteries, or to launch things into space (plus the premium for radiation hardening and ensuring it survives long enough because you cannot service it).

Given the current trajectory of battery and solar prices I just don't that space-based systems are cheaper in any way.

Of course there is a long-term aspect should we climb the ladder in the Kardashev scale: Once we used all solar radiation reaching earth we must move to space to grow. But that is decades if not centuries away.

What is going on with the font in this article? My Firefox renders it as a wired mixture of lower- and upper-case letters, all with the same height. Completely unreadable. Culprint seems to be this:

    font-feature-settings: "ss02" on;

The exact same thing is happening with the Gotthard Base Tunnel. Switzerland has completed it almost 10 years ago, Germany still hasn't finished the links.

It is combination of the German planning system, which allows the processes to be stretched out due to objections, and spineless politicians who don't really want to commit to a route and kick the can down the road (because whatever they do, someone will be angry; but voter's don't really make you responsible if the link isn't built or is delayed).

Both are right and it depends on which model you use and who submits those bugs. The capabilities of leading models went from 99% noise to 99% valid bugs in essentially a few months. Some projects are flooded with the former and need to take precautions to avoid essential DoS attacks on the maintainers.

Very cool!

Another maybe stupid question, would something like inotify(7) help to get rid of any active polling?

This fingerprint persists over private and non-private Firefox sessions until you restart Firefox. State actors might be able to connect your Google-login in FF window 1 with your tor session in FF private window 2.

To show ads you need people to stay on your platform. This is especially true once ads become more intrusive or of lower quality, something the big players seem to gravitate towards to keep revenue up. Google and Meta have ways to lock in users (networking effects, the best search engine available, having your data stored there).

I am not sure if OpenAI has that. Their edge regarding models is small, their strategy currently seems to be "buy ALL the hardware so nobody else can". Users can quite easily switch to other models.

Git packs objects into pack-files on a regular basis. If it doesn't, check your configuration, or do it manually with 'git repack'.

> Heat pumps are geothermal masquerading as electric

Air-to-air heat pumps are quite common 1-4 family homes. Even in Nordic countries such as Finland: https://www.sulpu.fi/heat-pump-sales-returned-to-a-growth-pa...

> And the highest number I ever heard for a heat pump was 135% [...] Truth is that electricity is great for kinetic energy but terrible at making heat. Most forms of energy can be transformed into another form of energy at about 50%. Electricity is the weird one where its 90% to motion but only 10% to heat.

Sorry but absolutely not, that's wrong on several levels. First off, in its most basic form of resistive heating, electric heating is already close to 100%. Heat pumps are even better, and I'll just quote Wikipedia

> At a cost of 1 kWh of electricity, they can transfer 1 to 4.5 kWh of thermal energy into a building.

The article describes that a lot of the requests are for non-existent URLs. Do you observe the same?

TSMC had the first copper interconnects, kind of their breakthrough node at the time, and the first EV-based process.

Here is how that looks like:

https://godbolt.org/z/rooee4esd

It's also not representative for the whole industry. BMW is profitable with their electric cars, and 18% of their sales are fully electric.

Going all electric with cars would add ~10-15% of electric demand. That's a bit, but not really a deal breaker, and something Norway would easily be able to offset by adding more wind turbines.

Am I not allowed to choose who I buy my stuff from? Or is it only businesses that are allowed to decline services at will.

And do you really belive the richest man in the world, owning one of the largest social media sites, is being "silenced"?

> What makes Musk different than Blackrock for instance?

Open support for right-wing parties and politics all over the world.

> OP doesn't live in the US, so maybe they don't feel this quite as acutely

It's the same sentiment in large parts of Europe, and a major reason for dropping Tesla sales. He actively supports right-wing, eurosceptic politics and parties in several European countries.

Your mother's advice sounds terribly selfish, honestly. Our society is pretty much build on the fact that most people are in some way "good" and will not break laws and rules even if they could get away with it.

There are tons of stuff every day I could steal, knowing that any law I might break would not be enforceable simply because no one knew it was me. Littering in the forest. Dumping toxic materials into rivers.

All that works because most people don't do it, only a few.

We could probably test this. I wonder if the results shift if the question is prefaced with something like "Here is a trick question: ...".

It's true that hire and tenure decisions are under the institution's control. But a lot of funding comes from external sources, and most public funding uses some sort of publication-based metric. There are exceptions, but that's the game. The CV of your PhD's is often judged by the publication list and the corresponding citations. That's research institutes where they might go, other universities, large companies etc. will look at this. It's difficult to change this system as isolated player, and coordinates efforts so far failed on the "what else" question.

This goes deeper than the institutions, actually. The KPI for many (non-industrial) researchers is the number of publications and citations. That's what careers and funding depends on.

Goodhart's law states "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure", and that's what we see here. There is a strong incentive to publish more instead of better. Ideas are spread into multiple papers, people push to be listed as authors, citations are fought for, and some become dishonest and start with citation cartels, "hidden" citations in papers (printed small in white-on-white, meaning it's indexed by citation crawlers but not visible to reviewers) and so forth.

This also destroys the peer review system upon which many venues depend. Peer reviews were never meant to catch cheaters. The huge number of low-to-medium quality papers in some fields (ML, CV) overworks reviewers, leading to things like CVPR forcing authors to be reviewers or face desk rejection. AI papers, AI reviews of dubious quality slice in even more.

Ultimately the only true fix for this is to remove the incentives. Funding and careers should no longer depend on the sheer number of papers and citations. The issue is that we have not really found anything better yet.

> a could equal b

Why not use "restrict" in this case?

This is absolutely what happens. It's even more tricky since our sensory inputs have different latencies which the brain must compile back into something consistent. While doing so it interprets and filters out a lot of unsurprising, expected data.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo_e0EvEZn8