murderfs

> But I do care about, for example, a recently published author, or someone who posts their paintings on social media. Regardless of where the law stands in each particular case, I think it's repugnant that statistical models were trained on these inputs with the intent of offering the ability to produce similar outputs without any payment or even attribution to the original artist.

I have somewhat more sympathy for individuals, but I disagree with the entire system itself.

Suppose an aspiring artist learns from someone's work, and I commission them to produce similar output to the original without attribution. Was the act of them learning from the work "repugnant"?

> If someone chooses to make their information free, then so it may be, but the issue at hand is very obviously not about the use of, e.g., copyleft materials. The AI companies knowingly chose to take material that they knew they should not have and used it to make their copycat machines, building those machines in such a way that those responsible can cower behind the letter of the law to defile its spirit.

I don't agree that they shouldn't have done it. I disagree with the letter and the spirit of the law.

The worse part is that it wasn't driven by populist resentment, it was cynical utilization of populist resentment as a cudgel to extort the governor: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/seiu-delenda-est

> 1. All modern LLMs are (in my eyes) inherently morally problematic. They were trained on stolen information, and where they didn't break the law they corrupted social contracts.

It's bizarre to me that over what feels like less than a year, enforcement of intellectual property and copyright laws has become the most important moral principle. Suddenly, it's your moral duty to enforce Disney's trademark of Mickey Mouse.

I reject this moral framing completely. Information wants to be free!

The diff is 23 lines long, the vast majority of which is documentation: https://github.com/eggert/tz/commit/5b5b39dae16f787740b8c0d4...

Yeah, my first reaction to your competitor analysis pricing is disbelief. I think it'd be a lot more convincing if you published your source files so that people could replicate your quotes.

It seems rather unlikely that solving the Navier-Stokes problem is harder than e.g. a better attack on a reduced-round AES. Perhaps they think an epsilon improvement in the exponent isn't worth publishing, but it seems more likely that they're intentionally withholding any results they have.

People keep repeating this, but it is only remotely close to true for the literal free plans and the small subset of consumers maxing out the pro plans.

At API pricing (i.e. what all enterprise customers are paying), inference is profitable, even if they're paying usurious rates on cost of capital for capex. Where the frontier labs are getting screwed is that they're in a Red Queen's race with each other, spending tens of billions of dollars per year training the next frontier model, and not being able to recoup the investment on that model before it's obsolete.

That's why you see the CEOs calling for government intervention to "pace the frontier": it lets them reduce investment on training without risking that their competitors keep going and make them obsolete. Unfortunately for them, the Chinese labs exist, and would love nothing more than to take the frontier, so they're in a bit of a pickle.

Pretty sure that's the eMudhra "private key is 4" issue.

Elliptic curves can be broken with 2^(n/2) steps, so you could probably do it on a single GPU within a day.

Vitamin B12 deficiency in vegans is a pretty obvious one.

But this is ignoring my point: if you go to the billions of people in the developing world and tell them they're going to have to switch their diets to soylent green because we, the first world, emitted too much CO2, they will rightfully tell you to fuck off.

> if you're honest to yourself you'll notice that plant-based nutrition is the only sustainable way to feed billions of humans on this planet

If you're honest to yourself, you'll notice that plant-based nutrition is not a sustainable way to feed billions of humans on this planet, because those billions of people would rather destroy the world than have some vegans enforce their morality on them while enjoying a lifestyle that consumes orders of magnitude more energy than some third world subsistence farmer's chickens.

It's not legal because it's unsafe for pedestrians, not for people inside the car.

To be clear, I don't believe either of these were wrongs. In my opinion, this is just a symptom of Facebook's PSC process training people to clout chase and demand recognition.

There's a certain irony in the fact that Facebook did basically exactly the same thing when they made their post here: https://developers.secure.facebook.com/blog/post/2022/11/15/...

I see zero mention of srcfs or blaze.

> Mainstream medical science along with common sense point to nicotine being addictive and bad for you.

Gwern's article cites many, many peer reviewed journal articles (aka mainstream medical science) about how nicotine's addictiveness is overblown, and you're citing three tweets.

Common sense points to you being clueless in all of your writing, even though I haven't read it, and I don't really feel the need to interrogate that view.

They were advertising tickets three days before they announced everything was cancelled: https://archive.ph/Uimqj

> What happens to my in-person or virtual registration fee?

> Information regarding GHC registration and other financial matters will be communicated to you promptly once we obtain a clearer understanding of AnitaB.org ’s financial condition.

Incredible.

If someone crashes into a bus stop at 75 mph and kills a family, who gets sentenced to jail?

(The answer is no one: https://abc7.com/post/mary-fong-lau-crash-driver-killed-fami...)

Something like 1% of corn grown in the U.S. is used to feed people directly. The majority of it is used to inefficiently make gasoline (via ethanol) or plastic, because farm subsidies make it profitable.

This doesn't look like a particularly thriving platform: https://mastodon-analytics.com/#:~:text=Mastodon%20Active%20...

The answer is that no one gives a shit: just look at people's views on adblock.

> Designed by Matthew Roberts and implemented by Claude. If you like this software why not hire me?

Why would I hire you when I could pay $17 for a Claude subscription?

Correct. See N1528: "Why undefined behavior for infinite loops?" https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1528.htm

> If Samsung and everyone else said "sorry Google', or even a large majority, you're out. Gone. Nada.

The OEMs are incapable of writing a competent operating system, and don't particularly care to.

> Google is also getting more and more pushy with Chrome. What if everyone depending upon that backend, shrugs and says "Sorry Google, we're hard-forking Chrome and we'll all maintain it".

With what maintainers?

https://chrome-commit-tracker.arthursonzogni.com/organizatio...

"�14" does have a nice touch to it.

That would be a reasonable argument if it were indeed their private lives, and they didn't go around offering to throw gangbangs for AI safety researchers.

That's not even the fundamental problem. Even if the payload runs optimally in the browser, the cost of CPU is so small that it's basically irrelevant.

If you waste your user's time with something that would take a full minute to run on a datacenter core, you're costing the scraper something like $0.000005: 360 W TDP on a 128-core EPYC 9754 * $0.10/kWh. In reality, it'll be substantially less than that, because CPUs don't use 0W at idle.

The only way this would make any sense is if there were many more scrapers than users and scrapers cared more about latency than real users, but that's the exact opposite of reality. The entire endeavor is so fundamentally misguided that it almost seems like a psyop.

It seems pretty easy? Someone viewing it through a mirror isn't going to see ads.

Most new construction with heat pumps are going to use similar thermostats, both because of improved efficiency since the outside unit wants to know how much heating/cooling load is being requested, and more importantly, because builders are lazy and would rather use a battery-powered wireless option than run thermostat wires.

Off the top of my head, Mitsubishi, Rheem, Lennox, and Carrier all have similar default options, with converter boxes for retrofits to 24V controls.

> Somewhat functional in the trivial problem domains, and always useless where design choices mattered.

This is laughable when you consider that semiconductor design is the least "trivial" problem domain, and it happens entirely in RTL. There's basically zero human intervention when it comes to layout: even floorplanning is being automated nowadays.

I interpret "can be cleaner than X and similar to that of Y" to mean "inferior to that of Y, but kinda close". Otherwise, it would be "cleaner than X and Y".