yongjik

5 ms·

31.
by yongjik 4mo ago
It's a two-sided sword. When you are the consumer, blame the producer. When you are the producer, blame the consumer. In this way everybody can blame someone else and ensure that nothing is done. For example, more people buying EVs
32.
by yongjik 4mo ago
Is this supposed to be sarcasm? As far as I know, America is the only nominally democratic country where cops routinely shoot people, and their number one excuse is that they thought they could be shot. Nothing makes cops more trigger-itch
33.
by yongjik 4mo ago
Eh looks like it already recovered about half of the plunge? KOSPI fell from 8,048 to 7,477, but now it's back to 7,807.
34.
by yongjik 4mo ago
I think there should be a relatively simple solution. Tax the homeowners proportional to their homes' market value. Either you get enough tax revenue to build more houses, or the tax burden is too high for those NIMBY to remain at th
35.
by yongjik 4mo ago
Meh, it's not like before public schools most children had access to tutors tailored to their individual needs. Badly misquoting Churchill, public schools are the worst form of education, except for all the other forms.
36.
by yongjik 5mo ago
If your input is an arbitrary float, you need to check for denormals (and maybe NaNs). You can do bitmasking trick to avoid conditional jumps but I'm skeptical you can do it faster than SIMD multiply instruction.
37.
by yongjik 5mo ago
Sometimes I hate being proven right so easily.
38.
by yongjik 5mo ago
[flagged]
39.
by yongjik 5mo ago
You're putting the cart in front of the horse. If the US economy didn't need low-wage immigrant workers, we wouldn't be complaining about them in the first place, because they would've gone somewhere else where the jobs
40.
by yongjik 5mo ago
> I saw a poll recently that people would rather live near a nuclear power plan than a datacenter. That's... their choice, of course, but doesn't seem logical to me. Yay people have finally become rational about nuclear power s
41.
by yongjik 5mo ago
I don't understand the argument. Imagine flipping positions. You're saying that if an American researcher goes to China, gets employed by a Chinese university, and do research funded by China which is then commercialized by Chin
42.
by yongjik 5mo ago
I have a hard time understanding this complaint. A US tech worker earning $340k bonus wouldn't even make news, it happens every year all around the silicon valley. That is, a US tech worker is taking much more for their own from those
43.
by yongjik 5mo ago
There was one particularly egregious scene in The Mandalorian. The protagonist had to fly from Planet A to Planet B without hyperspace for reasons, and he was waylaid by some kind of space patrol, and then he just "turns the steering
44.
by yongjik 5mo ago
What I'm saying is, people will still complain when the "ruling class" try to drive the progress because it does not conform to their worldview. Like, Canada once tried to implement carbon tax, which was even revenue-neutral.
45.
by yongjik 5mo ago
Also the terminally online crowd blaming rising prices on greedy billionaires, and global warming on the same billionaires. Tell them about carbon tax and they will non-ironically ask "Why should I pay more when it's the billio
46.
by yongjik 5mo ago
Trump is at -20% net approval and it's steadily getting worse even now. Seems like most Americans don't decide whether things are going great by looking at S&P 500.
47.
by yongjik 5mo ago
Sure, but when it happens it's no longer Iran's problem - it's your problem. (And maybe America's problem, unless America gains anything from the global trade burning down.)
48.
by yongjik 5mo ago
You know what... just down below there's a comment saying Nate Silver was always wrong, just like meteorologists... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
49.
by yongjik 5mo ago
But since it is a UB, there's no guarantee that your test program produces the same result as the same code running on production, even if you have the same compiler.
50.
by yongjik 5mo ago
"Culture" works by having a system that collectively punishes cheaters, so that people learn from their own (or others') experiences and internalize that cheating is bad and won't pay off in the long term. That's ho
51.
by yongjik 5mo ago
(Disclaimer: I'm working on AI related stuff, so I'm not exactly impartial.) Not saying AI is blameless, but I'm seeing a trend where the problem is clearly more about social media and how it enables every one of us to live i
52.
by yongjik 5mo ago
Reminds me of the incident last year when a South Korean government's server room caught fire, which contained the government equivalent of Google Drive, and the only backup was in the same room , and they all burnt down together. Som
53.
by yongjik 5mo ago
I wonder how much what Trump wants matters any more w.r.t. Iran. Trump kicked a hornets' nest. Now it's the hornets' turn to decide when (or if) they'll let him walk away. I mean, what's Trump going to do? Murd
54.
by yongjik 5mo ago
If it had failed it would've been a top science news. Every scientist dreams about the day when they're mentioned as "(...)'s experiment puts Newton's law of gravity in jeopardy."
55.
by yongjik 5mo ago
It would be also a more coherent story than what we got in the sequels.
56.
by yongjik 6mo ago
It's orthogonal to whether LLMs can be a useful abstraction layer, but ... I have a feeling that if LLMs were built on a deterministic technology, a lot of the current AI-is-not-intelligent crowd would be saying "These LLMs can on
57.
by yongjik 6mo ago
He's also older than Trump. His mind is likely not as sharp as it used to be.
58.
by yongjik 6mo ago
This may not be the end of the days of America the Superpower... but it may be the beginning of the end.
59.
by yongjik 6mo ago
> The farming water usage already exists. The data centers do not. Adding more on top of what farming is using is not going to help. We can prevent the data centers, so that's where the push back is. Well, to me, this sounds basical
60.
by yongjik 6mo ago
I think I've already explained my position, and I don't have any deeper insight than that, so I'll be only repeating myself. But to repeat one more time: when talking about probability, there's something like "not

More ›