mr_mitm

> Well dang, I thought it would just be a worse archive.today

OP states on their blog [1]:

> If every method fails, fall back to an archived copy from archive.is.

I'm wondering why I shouldn't just stick with archive.is then.

[1] https://dev.to/wafflehacker/12ftio-is-gone-so-i-built-my-own...

I strongly suspect archive.is is buying subscriptions to the big outlets with actually hard paywalls. The fact that both OP and the Magnolia1234 fall back to archive.is for the actually challenging paywalls support that. That's the difference to a Citibank account: you can't simply buy access for that.

In your blog you say:

> If every method fails, fall back to an archived copy from archive.is.

What do you reckon is the reason that archive.is is most reliable? I've seen the same in the Magnolia1234 plugin. If all fails, fall back to archive.is. What are they doing that you or the Magnolia devs can't?

Is it fair to say that Crawler spoofing only works on sites that don't care?

Google recommends [1] checking the reverse DNS hostname of the source IP. I don't see any room for tricks there. So if you spoof a whitelisted Crawler simply by choosing the right values for some request headers, it means the publisher's web team is either clueless or doesn't care enough, no?

[1] https://developers.google.com/crawling/docs/crawlers-fetcher...

Are we positive the account was enabled? If what I think happened, happened, then they dumped Active Directory password hashes, in which case you don't see the account status by default when using popular tools. I sometimes do password analyses for corporations, and in the beginning, when I reported a few particularly weak passwords of particularly powerful accounts, they often told me that this was an account which had been disabled years ago, so this wasn't useful information to them. Eventually I started filtering out disabled accounts.

Then again, it sounds like this organization had many issues. (Why was the former employee's account still enabled? Why didn't they mandate MFA?)

There are typically quite a few steps between initial access and domain domination, which I assume is what they ended up with, considering they have administrator account passwords. Well, unless you are using 123456 as the password for an admin account.

The center of mass of these natural collisions is a huge Lorentz transformation away from Earth's center of mass, which could explain why some unwanted effects are harmless to us. To put a paranoid person at ease you'd need to go a bit further. It's all covered in detail here: https://cds.cern.ch/record/1111112?ln=en

Similar to the Millennium prize by the Clay institute, the amount of luck and effort you need to receive the prize don't make it worthwhile. Plus, it's generally expected to use that money for further research. It would be advisable to focus on other endeavors, if money is your motivator.

It could be the beginning of Neutrino astronomy [1]. So far, we only used the electromagnetic spectrum, from radio waves to gamma rays, to observe the universe. If we could equally leverage neutrinos or gravitational waves, we could observe much more of the universe. For example, the cosmic microwave background radiation enables us to deduce the conditions at 300ky after the Big Bang. The cosmic neutrino background [2] could give us insight in the conditions 1s after the Big Bang.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino_astronomy

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_neutrino_background

Where else would you go look for a cubic km of ice?

Yes, and until then the intellectually honest position is to be undecided on the question.

You've seen zero evidence? What about the dozens of peer reviewed articles in the "references" section of the Wikipedia article?

It's simply a huge, beautiful coincidence. If the galaxy was teeming with life capable of interstellar travel, our planet would be famous for its perfect eclipses.

Let's not paper over that gap and find the root cause instead

What? No one says you can't say hello. It just shouldn't be the only thing you say

That's probably already true for 7 days or less

If you define the initial conditions such that their relative velocity is zero or parallel to the plane, yes. But that's not the case in general.

I'm pretty sure there is always a unique solution to the equations of motions (safe for some pathological edge cases perhaps). Classical mechanics is deterministic, after all. But for more than two bodies, there is in general no solution in closed form, and it's often chaotic, so not even computeable for arbitrary time frames.

The "about" info states that all of these are computed numerically.

It's well organized, the animations are smooth, and it looks beautiful... I'm not sure what to do with the information, but it's mesmerizing and fascinating. Great find!

I also don't remember checks, but I believe that having an email address of an approved organization was enough to pass.

I checked, you're right, but I think it's important to note that the prize did go to Perelman and he declined to accept.

There is https://knock-knock.net/, which is similar

It doesn't really make a lot of sense to contextualize a velocity with a distance or a time period.

You think those time periods are large because you see a lot of numbers in the units you chose, or because it is much larger than your lifespan. But in the grand scheme a galaxy is nothing but a spec of dust, 10k years a blink of an eye.

There is no other natural velocity that I'm aware of that we could compare it to, but we can say that the speed of light is the fastest there is, so how can it be slow?

I'm waiting for some data center to be built where no one can agree on who actually commissioned and payed for the thing. Every body "just followed orders" until it turns out that it was Grok.

The archive that bypasses paywalls is archive.today (or archive.is, archive.ph, ...) which is run by some shady person, not a professional organization like Wayback Machine.

That's a different archive

You also can run a Mastodon application server side and serve server-rendered pages. I'm not aware of anyone having done that yet, but, you know, be the change you want to see. It's probably got privacy implications.

How is that different from email, IRC, instant messaging, or anything else nerds use?

Why does he say what he feels? Is that how leading figures in the space define AGI - a gut feeling? What are the usual definitions and how can we test for it? Is there something like a Turing test for AGI?

Quantum Chromodynamics, path integrals, and what other mechanisms you need for deriving the half life are extremely complicated, especially for that many particles, so of course it's hopeless without approximations, which can be wrong, or are even wrong by definition. But the fact that it's prohibitively hard to solve the equations for such complicated systems doesn't indicate a gap in our understanding. You don't even have to go to xenon, this is already the case for tritium.