cowl

12 ms·

31.
by cowl 1y ago
There are very good reason that code should look a certain way and it comes from years of experience and the fact that code is written once but read and modified much more. When the first bugs come up you see that the velocity was not god s
32.
by cowl 1y ago
the next response would be "but then i would find myself taking the option that I don't like because the option that I like would put me in a disadvantage so since i can't control my options in order for me to have the best,
33.
by cowl 1y ago
this is about allowing business to offer other choices, other store rules still would apply. for example if apple would be to require it's option as always present together with the rest in the app, then noone could say anything agains
34.
by cowl 2y ago
we will end up again with edge being dominant just because it's the default one installed by Windows. what you say is nice in theory but you already have the Microsoft backed Edge and Apple backed Safari that are not hamppered by the &
35.
by cowl 2y ago
no, see the problem is that the machine needs a well defined problem, and the "BB(n) grows faster than any defined problem" is well defined but you would not come up with an insight like that by executing the BB(n) function. that
36.
by cowl 2y ago
well you try feeding the Busy Beaver Problem with large N to lean then and see what comes out.
37.
by cowl 2y ago
well that is the "beyond computable". we are somehow able to say that this function will not halt, and we wouldnt be able to do that if we only had computable power to simulate it because that would proove that the probem was deci
38.
by cowl 2y ago
Why should a complete simulation be possible? in fact there are plenty of things we can do that can't be simulated on a Turing machine. just one example the Busy Beaver Problem is an uncountable problem for large N, so by definiton is
39.
by cowl 2y ago
he starts with "consciousnes is not computable". You can not just ignore it as a central argument withouth explaining why your preference to think on it as basic computability theory makes more sence than his. What's more, wh
40.
by cowl 2y ago
> any kind of theorem or idea communicated to another mathematician needs to be serialized into language which would make it computable. This is a fallacy. Just because you need to serialize a concept to communicate it doesnt mean the co
41.
by cowl 2y ago
they are not content "owners" though. they have a a copyright that regulates who can copy and distribute that data. they don't have a say how that content is used when acquired legally as long as you activity doesn't con
42.
by cowl 2y ago
and 99% of the people will learn the ? shortcut in fraction second. it's just like every other operator ffs. are you dumbfounded everytime you see the channel operators (->) ? noone takes a second thought to them after the first co
43.
by cowl 2y ago
He was suing to remove the report from google results so FUTURE employers do not find it. so yes, the effect mattered to him. now even if he wins that case there will be dozens others that have reported this and will be impossible to remove
44.
by cowl 2y ago
the keyword being _phone_, not smartphone. Bambulab too will let you print from SD card without logging in their infra, they are just locking the rest of the ecosystem. 1 to 1 analogy.
45.
by cowl 2y ago
the question is whether that 25% jump is also because of the compromised first test.
46.
by cowl 2y ago
that applies specifically to this artificial problem google created to be hard for classical computers and in fact in the end it turned out it was not so much. IBM came up with a method to do what google said it would take 10.000 years on a
47.
by cowl 2y ago
This doesn't explain the legalese in Civil case juridistictions which almost all of Europe is. There is no case that can change whether something is legal or not. My pet theory is legalese is just to sound different, authoretative and
48.
by cowl 2y ago
she was right the first time when they announced this in 2019 and this time even they admit in their own press release: > Of course, as happened after we announced the first beyond-classical computation in 2019, we expect classical compu
49.
by cowl 2y ago
the most basic example was the declined proposal https://github.com/golang/proposal/blob/master/design/32437-... Some people didn't like the "try" keyword it reminded them too much of
50.
by cowl 2y ago
this part of error handling is pure religion. it goes even against one of the most basic go tenents. that code should be easy to read not write. Try reading and understanding the logic of a particular method where 75% of the lines are erro
51.
by cowl 2y ago
Those are the same kind of question. take god or the "special" out of the second one and you will see that is only that part that most react against. Noone reacts with the antropic principle to the Fermi's paradox, noone even
52.
by cowl 2y ago
more likely or less likely has nothing to do with observation indipendece. I flip a weighted coin and it's tails 99% of the time, it's the coin that is weighted it has nothing to do with me. The same thing with the parameters of
53.
by cowl 2y ago
Anthropic principle is the most useless of all and it's used to avoid explanation instead of trying to find one. Imagine Newton answering to why objects fall with "because if they did not we would be asking different questions&qu
54.
by cowl 2y ago
other engineering industries use standards that are good for stability but bad for efficiency and innovation.
55.
by cowl 2y ago
> Chess is stateless with perfect information. Unless you're going for mind games, you don't need to remember previous moves. while it can be played as stateless, remembering previous moves gives you insight into potential stra
56.
by cowl 2y ago
not even that. "unexplained matter" implies that there is some matter to explain (what type etc) when in reality is an unexplained observation that could be explained by current laws/constants if only there was some more (ac
57.
by cowl 2y ago
the mechanism is the same (that's why it impacts all weights) but the target of gradient descent is not the same. in finetuning they aren't saying "go down the mountain" anymore, but "go down toward this plateau&quo
58.
by cowl 2y ago
fine-tuning is not learning, it's controlling the response and you see it's absurd effects in countless examples where in the name of being politically correct the "weights" have been modified also for the past. (classic
59.
by cowl 2y ago
yes there is. how LLMs "learn" is by training and every new "fact" moves the weights of older learnings. you can not be sure that this movement has not caused past learnings to be forgotten or brought to absurd limits w
60.
by cowl 2y ago
this answer makes things even worse. "we are a small team so its ok for us to expose your pc to risks". If you dont have the bandwidth to do things securely dont do them at all.you are asking the devs to wait until you have time

More ›