qayxc

19 ms·

211.
by qayxc 3y ago
Not only that. The paper is only even remotely plausible if the author assumes 100% efficiency. Otherwise waste heat alone would turn Earth into Venus long before any tidal locking could take effect.
212.
by qayxc 3y ago
That's not what renewable means. Renewable energy means that the source is naturally replenished within a human lifetime. In other words, the source isn't permanently depleted by tapping into it. This is the case with solar energy
213.
by qayxc 3y ago
All these use metallic (or ceramic-like with metallic properties) super conductors, though. That was the point: the material properties. If it's not metallic or exhibiting metallic-like properties (e.g. BSCCO), the practical usefulness
214.
by qayxc 3y ago
I concur. The most funny part to me is always when an elegant and succinct one or two-liner in Haskell turns into a mess once proper error-handling is added. Complexity doesn't magically go away by choosing a different programming para
215.
by qayxc 3y ago
That's horrible to read.
216.
by qayxc 3y ago
A "sane" default style would require "default" content coupled with a "default" viewing device. None of which exist. There can't be a one-size-fits-all solution. In addition, content is more than just text
217.
by qayxc 3y ago
It's the latter. The current approach is akin to throwing the entire internet at the foundational model, train it for an epoch or two, and that's that. Afterwards, the finetuning with curated training material, and techniques like
218.
by qayxc 3y ago
In this case I don't think it is. There are legal questions that simply have to be asked and discussed before proceeding mass adoption of generative models. Lawsuits like this are tests to evaluate the current state of affairs and to f
219.
by qayxc 3y ago
What metrics do you use to tell the difference in performance? Just being curious.
220.
by qayxc 3y ago
> It gives too many levers. I don't agree that the horrible XML example is the result of that. There's a simple semantic difference between attributes and elements in XML: * there's only one instance per attribute * attri
221.
by qayxc 3y ago
> So if we are to add something to this article’s sentiment it could be an observation that we are also prone to misunderstanding things and jumping too quickly to conclusions. I'd add another observation: most of the cynical views
222.
by qayxc 3y ago
I won't say you're wrong, but the answer might depend heavily on the application.
223.
by qayxc 3y ago
Careful, careful. The COTS part is a bit misleading as a great part of the total cost is in testing and certification. Some might be under the impression that JPL just took some COTS parts, stuck them on Ingenuity and that's that. This
224.
by qayxc 3y ago
Oh, I definitely could post an equivalent example in Python and C. There's simply not enough space on the sidebar to do it ;) If you ever, like at all, had the pleasure of using any Python library without type hints - past iterations
225.
by qayxc 3y ago
You're looking at it myopically as well. JS has this semantic and the interfaces are designed with that in mind. Take C# for example. There is a List<T>.ForEach() function that passes the value to the delegate. Fine. But what if
226.
by qayxc 3y ago
Sure, if you want to look at it from that direction. Other languages, however, use a different default semantic for parameter passing and simply wouldn't allow using a function/lambda/delegate that doesn't explicitly tak
227.
by qayxc 3y ago
> Is there some great unmet need to send people to extreme depths, especially when unmanned probes can do most necessar work nowadays? Two reasons: 1) they had plenty of paying customers, so there was a demand 2) the CEO wanted to be re
228.
by qayxc 3y ago
Related: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.17493v2 Basically, if this paper is right, 2021 was the last year usable training data could be pulled from the internet. It could be all downhill from hereon out, as the amount of A
229.
by qayxc 3y ago
> Do we even know why AIs "hallucinate"? It's because, just like human memory, they aren't databases or search engines. Generative transformer models are basically next-word-prediction machines on steroids. They take
230.
by qayxc 3y ago
In JS every function is a variadic function, though. The problem is that many people ignore that fact for whatever reason. function fn() { } is semantically the exact same as function fn(a, b, c) { } in JS.
231.
by qayxc 3y ago
It helps avoiding number of arguments problems, though. Of course it doesn't change the core semantics of JS.
232.
by qayxc 3y ago
It doesn't have anything to do with the specs of map(). It's part of the core semantics of the language: function f() { } is equivalent to function f(a, b ,c) { } because under the hood the latter is simply f
233.
by qayxc 3y ago
Now replace def to_int(a, b): ... with the JS semantic equivalent of def to_int(*args): ... because that's how JS function declarations work. You simply have the option to assign names to positional parameters, i.
234.
by qayxc 3y ago
> Its a footgun that results from JS’s loose typing of functions, allowing them both to be called with discarded arguments and to be flexible in the number of arguments they accept. This just goes to show how one can use a language witho
235.
by qayxc 3y ago
It's not unique at all: C has this feature as well - just look at printf() and other functions that accept variable argument lists.
236.
by qayxc 3y ago
> No other language does this. Every language that supports default and variable arguments does this. This includes Python, C, and C++ and has absolutely zero to do with "loose typing" in this case.
237.
by qayxc 3y ago
How on Earth is that a WTF? Ignoring the specs will lead to unexpected results regardless of the language or API used.
238.
by qayxc 3y ago
The main problem with steel is that it can only withstand such pressures if it's of spherical shape (i.e. a bathysphere). This usually only leaves enough room for two to three people (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
239.
by qayxc 3y ago
I'd say this is the very definition of "overthinking it" instead of pattern matching. Pattern matching would lead you straight to the correct answer - joint probability is always ≤ single probability. Meaning the information
240.
by qayxc 3y ago
It's a matter of personal taste. Some people (including myself) simply like Intel syntax better. As a sidenote, I find it quite fitting since Linux - unlike Unix - was "born" on Intel hardware after all :)

More ›