lolinder

88 ms·

1501.
by lolinder 2y ago
> He's right but do people really misunderstand this? Absolutely. Karpathy would not have felt obliged to mini-rant about it if he hadn't seen it, and I've been following this space from the beginning and have also seen it
1502.
by lolinder 2y ago
If you're after simplicity, it's hard to beat docker compose for self hosting stuff. I run NixOS on my laptop and routinely run into things that aren't yet packaged for NixOS, but I've yet to come across a project where
1503.
by lolinder 2y ago
> While the hallucination problem in LLMs is inevitable [0], they can be significantly reduced... Every article on hallucinations needs to start with this fact until we've hammered that into every "AI Engineer"'s he
1504.
by lolinder 2y ago
HN in particular has a deflated view of the economy because our sector was going through such a big bubble from 2014 on, which got even bigger for a brief window around the pandemic. We in particular had a long way to fall back to reality,
1505.
by lolinder 2y ago
That's a very convenient way to frame it! You can't possibly be wrong because every counterexample is obviously either unwilling or brainwashed.
1506.
by lolinder 2y ago
That doesn't make any sense as an explanation for rising rates of loneliness. The US isn't more car dependent today than it was 10 years ago.
1507.
by lolinder 2y ago
I always wonder what would happen if you took these studies and actually broke down the US into units the size of the European countries we're being compared to. It's easy to make a study that shows that the US has more X than som
1508.
by lolinder 2y ago
Europeans get most of their perspective on US social living conditions from the terminally online, who are disproportionately likely to have no social life. The average American living in, say, the Midwest doesn't show up in the anecdo
1509.
by lolinder 2y ago
> and so on is actually directly in your own self interest. But people have this idea that taxes benefit nobody so we work scrupulously to avoid them. But my point is that it's not. It's in your interest to have those things bu
1510.
by lolinder 2y ago
They don't spend $0 on live customer support, they spend X%. At their scale there will always be high profile stories like this unless and until they spend enough to support every single user who runs into problems with their automated
1511.
by lolinder 2y ago
> This would cut into margins, but maybe it is not possible to run hyper scale companies only managed by a couple of engineers. It wouldn't cut into margins, it would make YouTube wildly unprofitable, with no viable path to monetiza
1512.
by lolinder 2y ago
This isn't an answer to their question about whether there's been any change for the worse, it's speculation about the reason for the change, assuming any such change does exist.
1513.
by lolinder 2y ago
Rather than acting like OP is stupid for not seeing the difference, why don't you enlighten us? From where I'm sitting it looks like maybe you're describing a difference in complexity levels? Vue compiles to a representation
1514.
by lolinder 2y ago
Books, if well chosen, do not have that problem. You pay for the content outright (or your library did), so there's no need to cram advertising in, so the content can actually be designed to be useful rather than to drag out the attent
1515.
by lolinder 2y ago
What you're describing is the same as in any market—wholesale costs less per unit than retail because there are enormous gains in efficiency for the seller when they don't have to deal with smaller units. In the case of shipping,
1516.
by lolinder 2y ago
> They don't seem to understand that (for the most part), taxes in their own city benefit their city. They usually understand that perfectly well, but understanding that doesn't mean that they should not rationally try to minim
1517.
by lolinder 2y ago
Unfortunately as often as not this doesn't seem to be the case. Expertise in a field often seems to create blinders.
1518.
by lolinder 2y ago
It's absolutely pseudoscience. 10k hours doing what ? And why would we expect to see an approximately equal amount of time to achieve expertise across so many different human endeavors? Veritasium has a really good video on the subjec
1519.
by lolinder 2y ago
The lungs, mammary glands, uterus, ovaries, vagina, placenta, semen, eyes, skin, and nasal cavity all have their own documented microbiome so far, and we've been finding out about new microbiomes about once a year. They are not a thing
1520.
by lolinder 2y ago
> Matthew Olm (opens a new tab), a physiologist who studies the human microbiome at the University of Colorado, Boulder and was not involved with the study, is “inherently skeptical” of the idea that populations of microbes could live in
1521.
by lolinder 2y ago
Most academics would agree with them that dynamically typed languages are a misnomer and in fact have no type system. And whether you want to use the colloquial term that counts dynamically typed languages or the academic one that doesn&#x2
1522.
by lolinder 2y ago
No, that's also entirely subjective. You feel that way, others don't.
1523.
by lolinder 2y ago
"Strongly typed" is not a well defined term—it basically means "I'm personally comfortable with the level of guarantees offered by the language", which is a purely subjective measurement. In context it's obviou
1524.
by lolinder 2y ago
I stand corrected. That said, at the time of Grant's writing copyright in the US was 28 years (with an optional extension for another 14 if the author lived long enough), which means that OP's proposal of 25 years would likely hav
1525.
by lolinder 2y ago
Then this isn't crowdfunding any more, it's DLC revenue.
1526.
by lolinder 2y ago
> the vast majority of their money in the first decade. So why do we need essentially perpetual copyright? I agree. I think OP's proposal of a fixed term of 25 years is more than reasonable. All I'm saying is that it should be
1527.
by lolinder 2y ago
> No way he would have done that without copyright. Why not? For centuries people wrote books so that they would have a legacy and be remembered. They wrote because they felt it was the right thing to do, or because they wanted to contro
1528.
by lolinder 2y ago
I agree, with the caveat that a literary work can be seen as an asset that has value which pays out over time. It takes a large investment upfront and then pays out slowly. So having a limited ability to pass on that asset if you die premat
1529.
by lolinder 2y ago
To be fair to him, this was an era where their ability to support themselves was limited—if not in practice at least by strong cultural stigma. The same cannot be said of most people today, and I therefore agree that it's a bad argumen
1530.
by lolinder 2y ago
> Mark Twain, for example, was worried about providing for surviving daughters. I think that's reasonable. I don't think it's reasonable to expect to be able to continue to make money after you are dead. Earn enough during

More ›