guy234

what

this problem does not look remotely interesting

The original text was from 1978 according to other sources

so the point of this is to give more power to the algorithm (since it includes unintentional autoplays) and less power to the people who upload the videos?

how could anyone possibly know that?

it begs the question of using optics for ML?

how is the proletariat oppressed by an ordinary non-management software developer?

why should it be straightforward to establish that?

that could directly cause a death

why wouldn't those people just donate to Mozilla?

Every sience has the dual purpose of performing measurements and identifying what measurements can possibly be taken.

oh

why

what

Whoever wrote this must really like taking pictures of electronics.

According to another comment itt it is federated.

you could replicate another planet with just as many or more beachfronts

why wouldn't you expect to see this on HN?

what

how could you possibly know that?

> Rarely does an article swing paraphrase by paragraph between interesting analysis and the opposite as much as this.

what

this observation is present in the 3rd paragraph of TFA

do you have a sound bar at least?

I feel like someone could describe foam emerging from the sea without implying that it is a process in time. It could be thought of as a process relating to the properties of seawater, wave agitation, sand etc. It is possible for a picture, not a video, to depict foam emerging from the sea. Also, there need not be a before or after, or even quantifiable extrinsic changes.

This article could be improved by deleting the emojis from it.

Fast food should not be consumed.

Perhaps an indication of its superficiality is the awkwardness of describing something as "content about" a topic. Its more like a binary, on/off, in that way similar to a lightbulb.

Im not really sure what you're suggesting so I can't really evaluate whether it is plausible. What I meant by semantical byproduct was that a definition based on a waveform needs to be supplemented with an argument that the definition is independent of the choice of waveform, because multiple different waveforms can describe the same particles depending on which components of the system are considered as classical.

So does this imply that the phrase "entangled system" doesn't mean anything about a specific system but rather indicates which types of statistics govern a class of systems produced en mass?

It could be used for FTL comms if you can figure out how to choose the outcome of a measurement before performing a measurement, which isn't something that I know how to do.