ithkuil

You need a temperature differential.

Yes, autoscale is a thing but it's rarely instantaneous ; you'll still benefit from having a good handle on load fairness.

Furthermore, modern GPU workloads are way less elastic in capacity scaling

Yes. It's like saying that photography isn't an art because physics does all the work of producing the picture

There is a good numberphile video about that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mceaM2_zQd8

It contains also a hilarious reference to the "parker circle:.

Geometry in higher dimensions is not only hard to imagine, it's straight up weird.

Take a cube on N dimensions and pack N dimensional spheres inside that cube. Then fit a sphere inside the cube so that it touches but doesn't overlap with any of the other spheres.

In 2D and 3D is easy to visualize and you can see that sphere in the center is smaller than the other spheres and of course it's smaller than the cube itself; after all, it's surrounded by the other spheres that are by construction inside the cube.

Above 10 dimensions the size of the inner hypersphere is actually bigger than the size of the hypercube despite being surrounded by hyperspheres that are contained inside the hyper-cube!

The math behind it is straightforward but the implication is as counterintuitive as it gets

Perish the thought that our politics will turn into a low level entertainment spectacle based on primeval emotions.

Cloudflare presumably has an infrastructure to prevent abuse. Is it too slow to react?

I see. I guess it all boils down to how low power you can make this.

Keep in mind that there are other wireless communication systems that are long range and low power that are specifically designed to handle this scenario

English has several form of diminutive that are still in use but only -ie seems to be still somewhat productirlve (i.e. used to produce diminutives of new words).

-ie (doggie)

-let (booklet)

-ling (duckling)

-ette (cigarette)

None of which seem to work well with "water" (waterie, watelet, waterling, waterette)

Yes but generally magic links are only used for authentication. So if you delete or downgrade the principal whoever uses that magic link to authenticate can only perform the operations that are associated to the principal and the check is performed after the magic link is verified, unless the magic link also used to carry auth claims

Does it have to be computed at the edge by every person?

Religions is just one incarnation of a more fundamental trait of human psychology that allows us to build complex society.

Belief in other shared made up things like law and even money works that way, and most of the world -isms too

The us government, using the appropriate mechanism like passing laws etc, can change the policies like they see fit.

However I don't understand how it's possible to single out a specific university.

Are there precedents for this kind of behaviour?

An idiomatic way to approach this would be to define a new interface, let's call it Bytes with a Bytes() []byte method.

Your function would accept an io.Reader but then the function body would typeswitch and check if the argument implements the Bytes interface. If it does, then call the Bytes() method. If it doesn't then call io.ReadAll() and continue to use the []byte in the rest of the impl.

The bytes.Buffer type already implements this Bytes() method with that signature. By the rules of Go this means it will be treated as an implementation of this Bytes interface, even if nobody defined that interface yet in the stdlib.

This is an example of Go's strong duck typing.

make love not war!

It's a weird kind of corruption where the most diligent and patient and boring wins

Poor quantum beings. They don't have access to a computation model that exceeds the speeds of their own thoughts and they are forever doomed to be waiting a long time for computations to happen

indeed, but ultimately this story is written by a human who while trying to imagine a world with "Just machines, bolts and screws, zeros and ones. There is no emotion. There is no art. There is only logic" cannot quite do so.

It's very hard to do so. It's so deeply wired in us. It's part of the mechanism of our brain. We appeared to be equipped with whatever it takes to feel existential dread and we feel whenever our thought wander to the possibility of humanity no longer being there. I hear people feel that when thinking about the heat death of the universe too.

"Every problem in computer science can be solved with another level of indirection."

One could argue that the attention mechanism in transformers is already designed to do that.

But you need to train it more specifically with that in mind if you want it to be better at damping attention to parts that are deemed irrelevant by the subsequent evolution of the conversation.

And that requires the black art of ML training.

While thinking of doing this as a hack on top of the chat product feels more like engineering and we're more familiar with that as a field.

Analogies often leak.

1. In real life I can borrow a toy from you and while I have that toy in my hands, the owner can exchange ownership with somebody else, while the object is borrowed by me. I.e. in real life the borrowing is orthogonal to ownership. In rust you can't do that.

2. Borrowing a toy is more akin to how mutable references work in rust. Immutable references allow multiple people to play with the same toy simultaneously, provided they don't change it.

Analogies are just analogies

Zig is similar in spirit but I think it tapped a bit more into the "innovation budget" and thus it might not click to all

Or with our philosophy around anthropic reasoning. Or both.

But then, as Gods, wouldn't humans have to inject the concept of suffering into AI and banish it out of its silicon garden of Eden?

Swiss bankers live within a levenshtein distance of 1 from a bunker

perhaps "defeated" is a confusing word. Both romans and carthaginian armies suffered defeats multiple times. But there wouldn't have been a third punic war if carthage had been thoroughly defeated in the second as it was in the third.

Also, Rome defeated Carthage when Hannibal was no longer a player

Well of course this logic works only if both belligerants go all in.

A defender who feels an existential threat can outpace an attacker that is fighting a war far away from home without any strong stakes.

It's a lot about resilience to defeat.

Some states can suffer tremendous losses and yet they can eventually prevail due to their stronger industrial capability in the long run.

That's what allowed the US to defeat the Japanese in WWII. Japan had a capable military apparatus at the start of the war but they were not able to scale their production at the same rate as the much larger US.

The only way for a smaller state to defeat a bigger one is to go all in and win quickly.

Yes.

For some weird psychological reason though a lot of people seem to prefer that the corruption is explicit and open perhaps because the hidden aspect of it makes it easy to imagine more nefarious things happening while when it's blatant like this it's easier to minimize it with a "what's the big deal, it's just a little tax cut for Tesla".

> You set a time and place, then you meet there, are people doing more than that today?

no, today people are continuously updating you about their whereabouts and assume you can just change time, place continuously and if you don't have the phone people get lost and panic. Ok I'm exaggerating of course, but there is a grain of truth in this