hunterpayne

I've lived in Spain a couple years ago. I've seen the quality of its health care. Its easily 20 years behind the US and that's being charitable. The family that lived next to me had a man who had the exact same break I had had 20 years before. He had worse, more primitive care than I did in the US decades before. I had to explain to them why it was a bad idea for him to sit in his wheelchair all day because nobody in the Spanish system seemed to know how to care for a simple broken leg. You got what you paid for...

PS Spanish taxes are absurdly high...insurance in the US is still cheaper than the difference in taxes between the two countries. All that and an actual working economy and energy system.

leftist != Liberal. And the EU leftists aren't liberal in any real way. That's why terms like left and right don't mean anything outside of a specific place and time and even then, its just shorthand. If they were liberal, none of this would be happening.

Being liberal is hard but saying you are liberal is a great way to hide socialist and authoritarian tendencies. And that's the problem. If they were actually liberal, they wouldn't be censoring the Internet. Liberals believe in free speech, socialists don't. Its a big tell as which kind of leftist you are.

From the Fabians...

"I’m not sure why the level of discussion in this post is so poor."

Its because bond yields and fixed income in general isn't well understood by the public. Even in finance, its often not correctly understood except by those working in fixed income or the IT teams that support them. Funny thing is, often the devs in those departments understand global finance better than the CEOs running those firms because of how fixed incomes is seen by other departments. Basically, its the lowest department because it doesn't get great yield while ironically requiring the best math and economics knowledge to do.

You are misunderstanding some basic things about bonds. Bonds are weird. Higher yield means the bond gives out more coupons (yield, money, etc). But the bond itself costs exactly the same no matter the yield when first bought.

The actual thing being bid on in the bond market is the yield itself. Higher yield is sort of like a higher price in that it means you have to offer more to the lenders. However, what they are actually betting on isn't the ability of the US government to repay. What they are actually betting on is the future inflation rate. So a higher yield doesn't mean what it means for corp debt (ie we don't think you will be able to pay this back). A higher yield for t-bills actually means lenders think inflation will increase in the future. Hence the FED raising rates to fight inflation.

PS But seriously, the bond market is very weird and most people mess up what changes in yield mean for different kinds of bonds because they don't mean the same things (unlike securities ie stocks).

PPS This is all because of the reduction in the amount of oil available worldwide, which triggers increases in global rates, which triggers increases in US rates.

The irony of this post is truly off the scale.

The term socialism wasn't defined by Marx. That's the heart of why you don't understand the definition of that word. There are a half dozen different branches with different definitions, all of which predate Marx. The only reason that you think that is that Lenin made him famous. But you can have socialism without any of the things you mention. It still doesn't work but its different. Think Finland in the 1970s or Sweden in the 1980s. Or Britain and Spain today. Those are all socialist societies by their own definitions. They also don't work.

PS Now a serious question, do you think your country is worth defending? If not, why should another country think it is?

The Chinese themselves blew up one of their own satellites as a test of their own capabilities. The missile was launched from the ground but targeted from orbit. They themselves say this and have since they did it 8 years ago. Your ignorance isn't an argument.

The Chinese have been bragging about taking out one of their own satellites in a test of their capabilities for 8 years now. Russia would but they don't have the money to even try.

This place is no better than X...seriously...it is just too small for the propaganda operations to target and yet it is still just as bad. I don't even think it is HN's fault, just the skew of the population HN attracts.

Tell me you don't understand deterrence without telling me you don't understand deterrence. Without nuclear weapons, WWIII happens in 1962. People that call it "an unresolved issue" are far more likely to cause warfare because you think of geo-politics as a series of problems to be solved. That's not how it works. Its about managing and moderating passions, not about "solving" problems. The constant injection of people who think this way is the cause of political violence and war. They are not the people who will "solve it" and bring about "the end of history". This is one of the greatest ironies of life.

So China has learned that their army and leadership needs to live underground for the duration of the war and only come out if they are in a crowd of civilians? They learned that their AA doesn't work against the US? Not sure what specifically you mean.

Also, if you are talking about "disassembly" via AI powered drones, the limiting factor there is, was and always has been how much mass you can move to the right location from a safe distance. AI and drones don't change that. They can however make standoff munitions cheaper and EW less effective...that's about it. AI in Ukraine (where the real lessons are learned) has been a bust so far.

True, this is just a much bigger one with a vastly larger amounts of hardware.

There is no NS proof here. Its just a counter example. There is another team working on a proof but they aren't associated with OpenAI.

The OpenAI team didn't make a Lean proof. They brute forced a counter example. The "other" team was doing what you described but they haven't "finished" their work yet. Also, their Lean proof was for a simpler version of the problem, not the full NS.

Also, OpenAI wanted the actual mathematician taken off the resulting paper. I'm not sure I would describe what OpenAI did as research. What the other team was doing does seem to be more like research but the hardware was still in those cases mostly brute forcing things and then doing something like a genetic algorithm to compose an actual proof based upon the results of a large set of brute force attempts.

The researchers were driving prompts and trying to actually do math.

The OpenAI effort was a pure brute force attempt. I'm not even sure an LLM was actually involved. I think they just used their hardware to run the matrix multiplies required by the search for a counter example. Perhaps some clever approach guided the search but that seems to be about it.

This is the most perverse marketing campaign in history.

"Our product might wipe out all of human civilization".

It is said that heavily regulated industries earn that regulation. Seems like the LLM folks really want that regulation.

1) Its spelled Medical

2) We have different regulations for different types of institutions

3) NGOs specifically exist to get around those regulations

4) A lobbying group (AARP) should have specific rules around how it can function. Lumping them with a professional standards organization makes it impossible to have reasonable anti-corruption laws. That's why NGOs exist, to make it impossible to enforce corruption laws. There is literally no other reason for it to exist as a category. We already have categories for lobbying groups and professional groups and charities.

"They are entities that have a civic purpose, not for profit."

If they had a true civic purpose, they would call themselves charities. The specific reason they don't is because an audit of their spending wouldn't meet the standards of a charity. Remember, charities can take government money. They just can't do it in exchange for a service. NGOs can. That's not about civic purpose. Its about different administrative standards. Standards that allow abuse. That's the entire point of them using the term NGO instead of charity.

"So everyone (even non-union workers) gets higher pay because of unions."

The median per capita GDP numbers say otherwise. I have watched Europe get noticeably poorer in my lifetime. Even the tourists can see it.

The people you are describing are not liberal. They are progressive which is very much anti-liberal. This is why terms like left and right are so loaded. You can have people who do not agree on almost anything being lumped together. For fun, you can take old Clinton or Obama quotes, post them on progressive forums and watch them call you (them) every name in the book. This is because progressives actually hate liberal policies but will do anything to not admit it because they want to wear the Dem brand as a suit.

Please remember that NGOs are not charities. And the entire point of an NGO is to get around restrictions on what governments can do. I think most of the grips about NGOs comes from the selling of NGOs as charities which they very much are not. They are however, taxed in the same way as charities and donate significant amounts to political campaigns (mostly local and state level).

So they get around centuries old restrictions on governments, get taxed like charities and donate heavily to political campaigns. That set of properties can and should draw significant criticism. When you act like they are charities, it just makes you seem naive. If they were charities, they would call themselves charities.

I doubt most people have put that much thought into it. However, a $100M a year for a website with an amount of traffic that isn't absurd, pages which are largely static, and doesn't have to secure financial transactions, seems a bit high to many people. Its that coupled with the constant requests for donations that doesn't match in most people's heads. For that amount of money, I expect most people think they can accomplish a lot more than the wiki foundation does. I expect that's most of where the criticism comes from, not the ideological attacks you are claiming.

"Cambridge is top ranked for everything they offer."

You know that there are places outside of England right?

20 years ago, this wasn't the case (at least in tech in SV). If you are seeing this today, its because of something (or somethings) specific. Could be the general increase in size of the companies or industry, a problem with recruiting or a problem with the universities that feed into that industry. Maybe a combination of those things. But 20 years ago, you could tell who worked in tech and who didn't.

I went to a similar school. It depended on major. If it was a major that the school was known for, say the top ranked CS school...then it was 100% that a grad was someone who was noticeably much, much smarter than most people. If they were at the same school but in a much less well recognized major (at my school...let's say history), then they were much closer to the average. If you are seeing students at Cambridge who are in prestige majors but without obvious skills...something else is happening and it isn't good. Otherwise, you are probably just seeing the differences between different majors.

Government systems leak information all the time. The type of institution managing the data makes little difference. Its how the institution manages the data that matters.

"software developer"...you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

I grew up on a farm about 100 miles from where this guy lived. I have never heard of him until now. The type of farming he did wasn't used on working farms since before he (1930s) was born. And there aren't any working farms along the Kentucky river. So yes, he was a LARPer.

PS Its distilleries that are along the river and the land there is far too hilly to grow row crops.

I have yet to see such research. I've seen research that says the exact opposite. The devs I see making such pronouncements usually aren't exactly the top devs on their teams. Seems like the result of the double burden to me.

How many new bugs get introduced in those fixes?

Counterpoint. The US has a higher birth rate than any country in Europe. Many of which have your parental-leave policies. BTW, there is absolutely no correlation between governmental policies and birth rate. You can't bully people into have kids. Population density is the most strongly correlated factor with birth rate.