bbor

69 ms·

841.
by bbor 2y ago
Well put! I’m personally a big Marx fan so I won’t give you all of economics, but let’s say “lots” ;) I feel strongly that math is a set of intellectual tools for dealing with quantities rigorously, so “lens” seems absolutely correct to m
842.
by bbor 2y ago
It's the blue "Free Trial" button below the dozen or so advertisements. Ahh, the irony! Sadly, the tagline doesn't seem to tease any information at all besides the very well known problems with modern journal culture, so
843.
by bbor 2y ago
His main thesis is that very high performance (which he defines as efficacy towards a known goal plus efficiency) and very high robustness (the ability to withstand large fluctuations in the system) are physically incompatible. …wha
844.
by bbor 2y ago
IMO the theory at the start of the post is well written and almost there, but it needs to more substantively engage with the relevant philosophical concepts. As a result, the title "efficiency is bad!" is incorrect in my opinion
845.
by bbor 2y ago
Can you share your reasoning behind the tagline? It seems like a hard sell, which doesn't necessarily help the otherwise gorgeous looking website and solid-seeming API choices. Like; JWT-Based Authentication: We won’t support JWT-b
846.
by bbor 2y ago
Well put! Well, the first sentence is -- I think there's ample evidence that chatbots are creative in the same manner as humans, for the simple reason that they speak coherently. I'm sure we all remember pre-2023 chatbots, which w
847.
by bbor 2y ago
Oh damn do I love a metadiscussion! I appreciate you taking a stand for quality discourse, and I agree 100% on your basic motivations, but I think this is overly dismissive. I'd say an audio discussion of this 100+ page dissertation is
848.
by bbor 2y ago
Thanks, was just coming back to edit that in! Should’ve known HN would get it faster. That does explain my negative reaction to the method — if I had to pick a single archenemy among the modern academies, Advertising would likely win top bi
849.
by bbor 2y ago
A) love the overall thesis/focus. The key points seem solid. B) I’m not sure how scientific this is. “We looked for instances of deliberate practice and found some” seems more like self-help advice than rigorous sociology? Or… anthropo
850.
by bbor 2y ago
Obviously the comment above is far from helpful in tone or content, but this spurred me to look it up. As a python guy, my takeaways are: 1. It’s designed by mathematicians specifically for math. 2. It has much better support for generic&#x
851.
by bbor 2y ago
Ok I can’t read the full article so apologies if they push back, but this seems like shareholder-directed hopium, to use the technical term. 1. The Search Ads case (trial?) has just entered the “remedy” phase after Google was found liable:
852.
by bbor 2y ago
Oof. I’m not sure describing rampant + tacitly-allowed sexual harassment is something I’d describe as “chaotic” and “some cultural issues”. At least they’re talking about it explicitly I guess? And he’s gotta sell his book, I get that… just
853.
by bbor 2y ago
I’m in that boat with you! But my family planning decisions do not excuse me from the shared human endeavor of morality. The question stands: what will you tell the kids visiting us in the nursing home?
854.
by bbor 2y ago
The movement was characterized by nonviolent mass protests and civil disobedience following highly publicized events such as the lynching of Emmett Till. These included boycotts such as the Montgomery bus boycott, "sit-ins" i
855.
by bbor 2y ago
Well put, you beat me to it! Specifically this line started my disbelief: Humans don't learn about things this way. Naturally, as is the hacker way, with no citations. I’ve only scratched the surface of pedagogy, but it’s a mass
856.
by bbor 2y ago
Ah. I see where you’re coming from but don’t really agree - I think you’re (understandably!) bringing in that assumption yourself from general climate worries. Countries have boundaries that you can come back from after crossing, as do peop
857.
by bbor 2y ago
Never loved this framework because the arbitrary quantization can make things look better than they are (“sure temps are up 4° but we’re still banning aerosols, so drill baby drill!”) but it’s certainly a good starter framework for getting
858.
by bbor 2y ago
How so?
859.
by bbor 2y ago
Huh. What do you mean by “sake of sport”…? Like, to see who’s the strongest? Regardless, I think you just misunderstood a bit: the concern here is deceptive practices, which when money is involved becomes fraud. No one cares that WWE is rig
860.
by bbor 2y ago
I’m pretty happy with our “no murdering” setup, even though it makes some people happy (in the moment). IMO there’s plenty of room for hardline stances. Who cares if gambling goes to the black market? There’s a black market for every seriou
861.
by bbor 2y ago
I don’t really understand the accusation here. Do you really think they rig (say) football games for ratings…? I’m a cynical guy, but that’s too much even for me. And how do you explain boring dynasties like the Warriors or the SF giants ha
862.
by bbor 2y ago
Much, much fewer people would gamble if you had to do it by finding some weird person and handing them cash and trusting them to run a fair book, than just clicking some buttons on an app. After all, that’s why they’re apps that are constan
863.
by bbor 2y ago
Now that is a gorgeous site! Well done. I’m not really the target audience (I do my own PDF parsing on plain ol’ Dropbox files), but I will say that $20/mo for storage is a LOT, even if it’s enhanced with built-in AI. And I’m not sur
864.
by bbor 2y ago
Hmm, fair points, especially on there not being a strict norm for charities. Thanks for taking more time to clarify. I’d say we disagree about the following somewhat indeterminate points: 1. Whether OpenAI has/could-have-had staying po
865.
by bbor 2y ago
Thanks for another polite response! I think this is the fundamental misunderstanding: What assets were gifted, exactly? ...It's currently a useless appendage and will never have any real power or resources until either OpenAI is i
866.
by bbor 2y ago
Good questions! Right now, OpenAI, Inc. (California non-profit, lets say the charity ) is the sole controlling shareholder of OpenAI Global LLC (Delaware for-profit, lets say the company ). So, just to start off with the big picture: the
867.
by bbor 2y ago
The anti-AI stance is what is baffling to me. I think it’s unfair to paint any legal controls over this incredibly important, high-stakes technology as being “anti”. They’re not trying to prevent innovation because they’re cruel, t
868.
by bbor 2y ago
So are Google and Facebook :shrug: Can’t find a good source for both rn but this one has alphabet in the top 50 nationwide for this election: https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/top-organizat... edit: and Sa
869.
by bbor 2y ago
Great point, and based on my amateur understanding you’re absolutely correct. I was mostly speaking so confidently because these founding documents in particular define the company as being founded to prevent exactly this . You’re right th
870.
by bbor 2y ago
This is the most important question, IMO! ChatGPT says that employees and donors would have to show that they were defrauded (lied to), which IMO wouldn’t exactly be hard given the founding documents. But the real power falls to the governm

More ›