avidiax

Presumably, those with the levers of power in their hands will willingly do as the super-intelligence says. Particularly when they start being outcompeted by other powerful people that do as the super-intelligence says, they either serve the super-intelligence or become irrelevant.

Obviously, some powerful people face little competition, and super-intelligence is still limited by available information, so some people will be able to resist.

Why do they need an IPO if they are going to unleash the singularity?

Surely raising capital by offering fractional ownership of the company that produced the god-like super-intelligence will be of no concern to the god-like super-intelligence or anyone else in short order . . .

It's a mistake to assume that the security must be embedded in the key.

It would be reasonable to have something like key and pin (similar to chip and pin[1]), where you have to enter a PIN and have the physical key to start the car. Or have a fingerprint reader. Or use the alertness camera for face authentication.

Since nearly everyone has a phone, and that phone is likely paired to the car, it should also be sufficient to sense that the bluetooth of the phone has paired to the car and at a sufficiently strong signal strength (and is not a new pairing).

The idea that the key itself must embed cryptographic hardware is a historical assumption that should be reconsidered.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMV#Chip_and_PIN_versus_chip_a...

Related: https://michael.stapelberg.ch/posts/2020-08-09-fiber-link-ho...

As to the author's core complaint (CAT5/6 degrading to 100mbps), I've found that the issue is almost always the termination at the jacks. Reseating the wires with a punchdown tool, or failing that, cutting a bit more off the ends and ensuring that the pair twists run all the way to the punchdowns has been enough to restore 1000mbps negotiation the few times I've had this issue.

There's a really simple solution that people will hate: server goes offline at night.

I've seen this a few times, and it's pretty annoying as a user, but ultimately it's not that bad usually. If you are ordering something at 3am, the physical shipment still occurs during daylight hours. Many banking operations are not actually instantaneous, they settle in a batch job overnight.

And this doesn't have to be binary. Providing a read-only interface provides lots of value while having a reduced attack surface.

There is path loss to consider. I would imagine that large scale electricity generation is more efficient than small scale ICE engines, and EVs have regeneration, so probably the EVs still come out ahead.

And the emissions can be more easily controlled/scrubbed at the large scale.

This is useful on non-customized machines, but I always install fzf now, including the shell integrations like fuzzy history search bound to ctrl-r.

https://github.com/junegunn/fzf

For those wondering why this is interesting, see the discussions.

Seems that the game is struggling with the costs of running it, since every user creates AI token costs.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/3948460/discussions/

There is evidence that CBT is detrimental for several psychologies, including BPD, C-PTSD, OCD, autism spectrum.

It's my own experience that CBT was only helpful at recognizing distorted thinking, which didn't resolve any of my other problems, and worse, was effectively gaslighting me by claiming that if I feel bad, I must be distorting my thinking somehow. It effectively has the therapist invalidating the patient, which is often the patient's core injury (parental invalidation).

CBT also reinforces certain maladaptive coping strategies, like intellectualization, rationalization, emotional numbing, etc. Repressing your feelings and intellectualizing everything is mistaken for progress under CBT.

Lastly, I think that CBT being first-line and so widely available means that most people seeking therapy will probably get CBT first. The practitioners of CBT won't always be able to recognize that CBT is limited for this patient and refer to a specialist in another modality, like schema therapy, ACT, DBT, etc. So many people will go to therapy multiple times, get very little benefit, and come to believe that their situation is hopeless or that therapy doesn't work, when the problem is that they've been offered the wrong treatment.

I feel it's more complicated than that. I wouldn't be surprise if Beijing does not actually know whether this was a lab leak or not.

The local government might know. They would have started a cover up reflexively.

But in either case, it could be that neither the local government nor central government wants to know or to find out. Ultimately, destroying the evidence and failing to cooperate with foreign investigators has cost China very little or nothing, even.

In short, I feel China should be admonished for covering things up, but not that the cover up proves the lab leak.

That's an interesting idea, but it could be argued that this assumes that all of the world's timezones will agree to observe the same set of leap seconds as they currently do.

Otherwise, it shifts timezones from being 15 minute granularity to 1 second granularity. Not technically impossible, but will definitely make cross-boarder meetings interesting once the discrepancy becomes large enough. I feel the 15 and 30 minute timezones are already bad enough.

An interesting project, that buries the lede to another interesting thing: abolishment of the leap second.

> In November 2022, the General Conference on Weights and Measures decided to abolish the leap second by 2035

I think the story goes that when the leap second was standardized in 1987, the wold was much less connected, there were fewer systems, and hence it was practical to keep astronomical time and civil time coordinated.

But this causes so many bugs and difficulties in practice that companies like Google don't perform leap seconds, they do leap second "smearing". But even smearing has issues, since there are multiple algorithms.

Even worse, the Earth sometimes accelerates, and there was a prospect that we might need a negative leap second, which has never been put into practice.

And as daylight savings makes everyone painfully aware, the public can tolerate even hours of misalignment between civil time and astronomical time, and even an hour adjustment.

So if we decide that we can tolerate a whole minute of skew, we need no leap minute for 50-100 years. And if we could tolerate an hour of skew, we'd not need a leap hour for millennia.

Of course, this is all can-kicking. If a leap second is difficult in practice, a leap hour in UTC (not a flip between a daylight savings and standard time zone) would be even more difficult. I feel the eventual solution would be to very slightly adjust the civil second to be shorter, so that the error begins to reduce.

Can you give an example "their side" that explains the outcomes the parent comment expressed?

What you are describing is emotional neglect and a failure of parenting.

You were meant to learn to recognize and name that energy and emotionality, and then learn to sit with it and develop adaptive coping strategies as needed, not maladaptive ones like negative self-concept and emotional repression.

It can take quite a long time to realize all of this and unlearn the patterns, and unfortunately, first line therapies like CBT are possibly detrimental for these issues.

Edit: also, you need not be fair to your parents. They are meant to adapt to parenting you, even if you were legitimately overactive or overemotional. Instead, you adapted to them.

Subtitle: A new class of foundation model for 3D electromagnetic fields with a step change in capability and out-of-distribution generalization.

------

In addition to some cool visuals in the article, they've also published EMVal, an evaluation dataset, which might be a basis for an open-weights model for hobbyists or less critical designs.

https://huggingface.co/datasets/ArenaPhysica/EMVal

Does anyone know how UV indexes reported by weather apps (including forecasts) work?

I've found that some sources report lower UV index on cloudy days, whereas some seem to indicate the same index as a sunny day.

It's not clear if these sources all have a different model for UV, some being more sophisticated or conservative, and whether any of them are backed up by a UV meter.

Would an eye patch work? Maybe a flesh colored one?

And the charging port will be on the bottom.

I see, so only if you are running an AI cluster. And what is it transferring between the nodes? Partial computations?

Is there an actual use for this in a homelab? Isn't 25gbps enough that no SSD will saturate it?

One of the problems with this kind of marketing is that there are essentially no base-models available at dealerships. So the flexibility supposedly provided by making the gauge cluster an option is not actually available to the consumer. This is just a money-grab while advertising a low price.

The ads all show the fully loaded model, "starting from" $LowPrice. We need a rule that the price shown is for the fully loaded model ($HighPrice), maybe fine print "configurable as low as $LowPrice". And then they have to actually allow you to configure that base model, and stock it. Otherwise, it's just effectively false advertising when every dealership gets just one base model that they will not sell to you.

I would like to agree, but that's not how insurance works, at least in the U.S.

You get your catalytic converter stolen, and you will pay for it three times. The first is you paid for the original one. Then you paid for insurance to cover its theft, and likely your payments over the years have already paid for the catalytic converter a second time. And then after it's stolen, your insurance rates will raise such that you are paying for a 3rd (maybe fourth) converter, just on a monthly plan now.

Now, of course, shooting the thief is only cheaper if you don't invest much in your weapons and training, and don't face any legal scrutiny afterwards and need to hire a lawyer.

It's not irrational if you know that the insurance company has mispriced your policy, and filing a claim won't be more trouble than it's worth.

Getting a contents policy in a safe neighborhood where you know that there's little risk is likely not a good deal. Getting a contents policy when you've learned that your neighbors are getting into hard drugs is probably a good deal.

Paying $19/mo for third-party full coverage + theft on your $1,000 mobile phone is probably not a good deal even if you know you are high risk, for the simple reason that at $19, they game must be that they will find any reason to refuse to pay, and will give you a poorly refurbished phone for your troubles if you make them honor the insurance.

> amusing

You should find it insulting that they are likely selling that location data, not even to the highest bidder, but to a data broker that resells that data to anyone that will buy it for any price they'll pay.

It could be a typical design that the camera and LED always have power, and the LED is switchable.

Giving the camera plus LED a separate power supply means that the camera has to boot or come online, which maybe increases the dwell time. And the camera is not visible on the USB bus when powered off.

I think there's more engineering to Apple's design than it first seems.

There would be a bunch of Super PACs with a fabric swatch as a logo.

Under my proposal, if someone wants to make prints of one of your old photographs, you are getting ~$20, which is ~$20 more than you are getting now. So it doesn't seem like a damage to you. If you get famous and now you could sell a print for $2,000... how is this helping society since the work has already been produced, so no new incentive is necessary?

I suppose the rule could make reference to a rival good, i.e. the 22nd and 23rd editions of the calculus textbook. It should not be reasonable for the publisher to make the 22nd edition only available for $1,000, and the 23rd edition for $250. But that definition would invite many lawsuits and chilling litigation in general. A clear definition based on the historic price is much simpler.

You can still number your limited runs, and your limited runs still have increased numismatic value over some other reproduction.

I don't envision licensing of performance rights in this system, just recordings or reproductions.

Is this a reduction of the rights granted by copyright? Yes, intentionally so. It is stripping copyright holders of the right not to copy, against the interests of society in granting that copyright in the first place.

Copyright law desperately needs a production requirement or allowance.

The copyright owner must make new copies of the work available; the price must be no greater than the original price (not inflation adjusted). And if they fail to do so, anyone may produce copies and escrow the original price (less the cost of production) for collection by the copyright holder.

That means that orphan works are effectively in the public domain. Calculus professors can ask students to get the cheaper 2nd edition, not the latest 22nd edition. And a company like Google could make scanned works available in their entirety for a small amount of money for each work. And the copyright holder still gets their end, without having to arrange a printing or hold stock.

This is an intersection of many difficult aspects:

* LLM Chatbots are currently perceived as a safe space where suicidal thoughts can be discussed, without fear that a welfare check and involuntary commitment is going to be triggered. Attach liability to this and the safest/easiest thing for the AI companies to do is always refuse the prompt if suicide is discussed. If they are required to inform the authorities, your chat account will need location services.

* Involuntary holds are a good solution to some kinds of suicide risk, particularly those that are either acute or treatable with medication. But they actually make some patients worse off by destroying trust, disturbing life patterns, and saddling with debt.

* Mental health care is famously expensive, and not so accessible. LLMs are available 24/7 and are cheap. There's both a huge danger to unqualified advice and opportunity here for accessibility.

* Even if we claim that LLMs should not act as a therapist, they still need training/evaluation on mental issues. AI psychosis will keep happening unless we start training and evaluating AI on intervening appropriately.

* There are probably more subtle forms of AI psychosis that are not being detected yet. AI sycophancy plus lack of context means AI can be highly reinforcing in areas in which someone would actually benefit from being challenged.