Sharlin

6 ms·

61.
by Sharlin 21d ago
Sure, I could've said "upper bound" :P
62.
by Sharlin 21d ago
A quick and dirty approximation of the number of digits in n! is n lg n, which approximates n! from above, via the inequality 1 * 2 * … * n ≤ n * … * n. (This approximation should be familiar to many from an algorithmics class.) For
63.
by Sharlin 22d ago
Your position seems so astonishingly alien that I don't even know how to start replying. It seems biased against the entire concept of how human cooperation works.
64.
by Sharlin 22d ago
How so? Many EU states have benefited enormously from being on the receiving side of EU subsidies, which obviously would be out of the question without full integration. Norway, Iceland, and Switzerland have rejected membership, which essen
65.
by Sharlin 22d ago
>> Also, game theoretically it's of course more important to not make leaving (or threatening to leave) the union seem too lucrative. Because you simply wouldn't be offered the option of just deescalating your full membershi
66.
by Sharlin 22d ago
In the past years it has become pretty clear that even the mainstream right wingers/neoliberals of the EU (ie. the EPP) appear to be ready and willing to drop or loosen all kinds of annoying ethical, environmental, and consumer protect
67.
by Sharlin 22d ago
The UK already enjoyed a large amount of unique concessions as a full member. The rest of the EU was right not to give in. Also, game theoretically it's of course more important to not make leaving (or threatening to leave) the union s
68.
by Sharlin 22d ago
As I asked another commenter: Who is the "you" who has the power to tell random data centers to shut down, inconveniencing their other clients? Never mind to order air strikes? You cannot just handwave away the problem by positing
69.
by Sharlin 22d ago
I don't know what experiment you refer to (some hallucinated one perhaps?), but there was nothing like that in the Huggingface incident. Nothing about the scheming, the message board, never mind the Artifactory and Huggingface hacks we
70.
by Sharlin 22d ago
Who is this "you"?
71.
by Sharlin 22d ago
Do you understand the concept of the cloud? Aka someone else’s computer? The whole point is that you don’t have a plug to pull because you don’t even know where the model is physically running, even if it’s your model. And if we’re talkin
72.
by Sharlin 23d ago
LLMs are run in the cloud. There’s no physical power cord or Ethernet cable that you can unplug. And even if there were, the runners of these models have been utterly oblivious as to what their agents have been up to. How do you propose to
73.
by Sharlin 23d ago
The "rich" mapped to our world are the middle class (which only barely exists in Ankh-Morpork, just like it only barely existed historically in the real world). We could define "middle class" as the people who can afford
74.
by Sharlin 23d ago
There’s some amount of gradient between use-once and fully bespoke clothing, and most people’s economic means are positioned somewhere on that gradient. Indeed it’s a U curve of sorts – cheap clothing can be surprisingly expensive (see also
75.
by Sharlin 23d ago
It seems astonishing to me that a "relatively complex" intercontinental trip these days means "have to spend a whole night waiting for the next flight".
76.
by Sharlin 23d ago
Not all crimes require a mens rea. Criminal negligence is a thing.
77.
by Sharlin 23d ago
We just need QA agents to check the work of the coding agents (yeah, I’m sure that’s already a thing and people are saying this in all seriousness).
78.
by Sharlin 24d ago
There is no closed-form solution for finding the roots of >4th degree polynomials in general, but that doesn’t preclude many families of >4th degree polynomials from having closed-form solutions. As a trivial example, x^5 - 1. The exa
79.
by Sharlin 24d ago
Which is very convenient (and necessary for backwards compatibility) because programs could be (and were) written to assume they're in B: (and the DOS disk is in A:), or that they're in A: and the user's data is in B:, or a t
80.
by Sharlin 24d ago
Did you read the friendly article?
81.
by Sharlin 25d ago
Pedantically, the phrasing in the article is incorrect because macro invocations are permissible in type positions. But as you said, the macro invocation syntax is nevertheless not ambiguous with !-as-type (or !-as-operator for that matte
82.
by Sharlin 25d ago
> My expertise in writing software gives me unusually good visibility and it makes me much less willing to blindly trust its priors in double-entry accounting, finance, law, operations, or whatever else I cannot personally evaluate at ex
83.
by Sharlin 25d ago
Four because you have to count 8086 itself (486 was one, not zero, geverations before the Pentium and so on).
84.
by Sharlin 25d ago
Yep, they can have static methods, as it were (in Rust lingo called "associated functions"; "methods" in Rust always take a `self` receiver). Traits can also have associated types and associated constants, which (natural
85.
by Sharlin 25d ago
There's also the fact that for all intents and purposes, the real floating-point unit of any x86 in the last 20 years is the SIMD unit, and legacy x87 instructions are emulated on top of that.
86.
by Sharlin 25d ago
Sure, but this was five (or six?) generations before actual superscalar x86 processors.
87.
by Sharlin 25d ago
Ah, you’re just a troll. Flaggety-flag. Have fun in the hellban-land.
88.
by Sharlin 26d ago
No they do not. Smart people are in no way immune to making naive, ignorant, or not-well-thought-out arguments. Also, if you feel that someone attacks you personally, responding in kind can only ever make you look like an idiot.
89.
by Sharlin 26d ago
I don’t know what spectrum you’re on, but attacking an argument and attacking a person are two wildly different things. There’s nothing pedantic about that.
90.
by Sharlin 26d ago
Casting Leomund’s Secret Chest, now comes with TROFAST modular storage management system.

More ›