asdewqqwer
asdewqqwer on Hacker News
If my memory was correct, a third of the edits is from him, not editing a third of it. There are a large and small edits. I think lot of it is mechanical and automated.
One thing to notice: Now, even in EU, if you turn on Google activity (so that you can see chat history), Google will train on your data. I remember it wasn't the case when in 2.5 pro period.
That was the result of not being successful in development and then they shifted to it. It was not like this at beginning or by design.
platform deepseek com's tos enforces use all your data on training, which is a major set back for me.
Other than that, I think they are cheaper last time I compared.
Always confused by text website that tries to prevent people from select or copy or right click.
Hot take, but as long as human dose not need to eat food half of the political problem will be solved.
Why is it a reductionism view? A true reductionist will no doubt claim taste won't left as well, at least not as a non-private langauge.
But this is basically reinventing the term "Aesthetics" which is a field that had several centuries of philosophy research about it. Not all of them will agree AI cannot have it.
Actually I think it is possible to reconcile Kant's third critique with the statement "LLM is possible to make aesthetic judgement" (with certain generous application of principle of charity, naturally).
I use a mini amd pc with a disk bay. Surprisingly it is cheaper than many nas, and much more configurable (from memory to ssd) and have a much better gpu.
The only challenge would be finding a very good cable that stays solidly.
At this stage. No doubt calculus had plenty industrial benefit.
Cheating is only fully unethical under two radical assumption:
1. School is perfect.
2. With a diplomat from a perfect school, the society's employment process is perfect.
I don't think either the definition of perfect nor the way of achieving such perfection can ever be agreed upon.
There has been extensive criticism on meritocracy in recent years, such as The Tyranny of Merit by Michael J. Sandel.
Wake up, it is open. You can tailor it to your whatever kind of ideology. It is not like Anthropic which will force you to suck Dario's propaganda.
The only uniqueness of humanity is intelligence. If there is really AGI, human definitely is more close to it then other animals.
Every site should automatically get its own container.
This will break almost all sso when authentication service is at different domain.
Well, maybe because of the two ungrateful college students who dared to write in their essay the following notorious statement:
> We expect that advertising funded search engines will be inherently biased towards the advertisers and away from the needs of the consumers.
I highly recommend you to blame these two guys for their lack of recognition of how great Google is, here is their name: Sergey Brin and Lawrence Page.
You do realize
> having mostly succeeded at giving the poorest people one Earth an equal product to the richest people on Earth
is equivalent in this scenario of saying:
> having mostly succeeded at exploiting the poorest people one Earth an equal amount to the richest people on Earth.
While the poorest people have less already, right?
I thought it should always be common knowledge that there is no way for any organization of 100m people to have one single mind.
It is hilarious to see people from arguable the most polarized political systems in the world believing the evil 1.5 billion people across the sea share one single mind, either a saint, or a devil.
SOME human relationships are the most valuable thing we have. Many (if not most) human relationships in many cultures are just trespassing everyone's boundary via peer pressure.
Disclaimer: I am from Scandinavian.
And it is somewhat correlated to my point because?
You speak as if middle of (not even statistically divided but carelessly divided) human opinion groups is neutral. There is something called facts, and we are living in a physical world.
Unless you also believe the neutral view is earth being half flat and half round.
Read Second Amendment.
Also, governments consists of a large amount of human each acting for their own benefit. Assuming they can easily collectively united as a single force to use violence to harm all citizen (on the topic of privacy, it really is the case) suddenly is wild.
On the contrary, for a limited government, it very likely will result in using the monopoly of violence to provide extreme capitalism style IP and private property protection which results in dominating power of large companies. On the other hand, every bit of history demonstrated you can never maintain monopoly of violence if you are really against people.
Monopoly on economic is strong because it can be guarded by violence, while violence cannot be easily guarded by itself within a country (unless AI overlord really comes).
Read more history.
Any one with critical thought should realize government behavior are usually symbolic and does not necessarily try to solve what it claims to (try to) solve on paper.
Given the capability of fable and the shockingly repetitive silly mistakes they made when publishing/updating something, I am starting to wondering whether Anthrophic can afford Fable for everything themselves.
A simple search on Wikipedia will inform you how ignorant your reply is. I won't spend the time to educate you.
People always conflate this statement. Only government can take "right" from people. Just opposing people don't make them lose their right. Otherwise it is taking away the right to say against what you say.
At 21 century, especially on a topic regarding Europe, I thought we should have long learnt the lesson from how problematic Legal Positivism and naive "freedom" is from Weimarer Republik‘s constitution.
In short, freedom should at least maintain the capability of preserving basic poltical freedom. From my understanding of that party, they are clearly against other people's existing political freedom.
Feel like could reference how those CAD script languages do it.
Yet a published peer-reviewed research should be against humanity. I am also curious whether such research can bring knowledge that apple don't know, otherwise even it is impressive, there is a level of sadness in it from my view.
