hermannj314

But DoorDash has a patent on giving you a deal if you combine your order with another restaurant, and giving you a higher price unless it determines that pisses you off and then backing off a little. Those contributions to humanity must be protected.

I do think certain tax incentives to create jobs, contractual obligations between employer and employee and legal restrictions on termination of employment can create a condition where someone is responsible for employing you.

Amtrak has a $500 10-segment, 30-day rail pass in the US.

I am doing a winding Seattle to Lancaster, PA trip visiting friends and family.

Currently heading to Yuma, AZ after spending yesterday in the Bay Area.

I see you, and I feel the same way. You have articulated the dread of the monotonous sisyphean slog of being middle-aged.

44, unemployed since July, on a cross country train trip trying to decide if it is worth going on. Stood on a bridge a bit too long the other day just wondering what the point is.

It is over for a lot of us in IT. It isn't going to get better, it is going to get worse very quickly. Rather than tell myself a convenient lie, I'd rather try to figure out why to keep living in a world like this.

Anyone going through the same thing, I hope you find something worth living for.

I wouldn't believe this until it happened to me. New bedding on prime day - came used and stained. This is fucking disgusting.

Amazon is like - we will send you a replacement but you have to print a label, box it back up and drive to a UPS store to return. Why are we working for them for free? You send me soiled bedding and the reply is to make us do work and then get the product we originally bought.

I tried quitting these people years ago, its hard to do.

Currently, I am doing firmware development for my clients, so I do not have a CI pipeline. I'm doing build, test, flash manually on the bench.

(about to be hit with rotten vegetables by the purists...)

Exactly. I'm running forgejo in a container, pushing backups to a private S3 storage, and sent the forgejo team a small liberapay payment.

Maybe 30 minutes to get it all setup and then I moved on with my life.

Assuming the code is black box, an outside observer would need no more than a thousand observations before they could definitely say something was off about your rand_1_to_10() mod 3 code (with 95% confidence).

But in the case of the random_u64() mod 10, you would need the heat death of the universe number of samples before that bias would be noticeably distinguishable from random.

Is there an actual example of where that specific case could be significant for anything other than maybe nation-state cryptography?

I am using pi the same way everyone uses Codex and Claude, but pi makes it very simple to make folders to make the agent behave a certain way and that was easy for me to understand.

ChatGPT Desktop seems to intentionally hide what they are doing and where they are storing state, sessions, config, I never had any idea what is in context or what "archiving" even means. I got sick of OpenAI hiding how ChatGPT Desktop was working. I opened pi and the default behavior shows me how much context I am using, how much that costs and tells me where it stores my session data.

Suddenly it was all demystified and that is why I use pi. It has nothing to do with a functional gap, it was the joy a using a harness that was transparent about how it worked.

Torres v. Madrid (5-3)

Carpenter v. United States (5-4)

Collins v. Virginia (8-1)

Barnes v. Felix (9-0)

These are all Supreme Court cases that were specifically about the 4th amendment and happened in the last 10 years.

The 4th amendment is over 200 years old and yet requires constant supervision by the Supreme Court to define the word reasonable or to police the lower courts understanding of precedent.

So you are wrong, with whatever presumption you are making that the word "unreasonable" is well defined.

It is not self-explanatory how to define the weasel word "unreasonable"

I see no evidence that in our nation's 250 year history or the broader practice of law (specifically adversarial law), that lawyers are working to make their job more efficient, legal outcomes more reliable, or legal tools more accessible.

Burn their entire industry to the ground. I welcome making the practice of law an AI-only field and ban humans from working in it to remove prejudice, misconduct, expense. As a former foster parent, I've seen children being delayed justice for weeks because two lawyers couldn't find time for a 15 minute conversation in front a judge. I've hated all lawyers ever since. Gatekeeping priesthood of the 21st century.

The retailer or distributor can also be named as a defendant if the manufacturer is difficult to track down, bankrupt or overseas according to me spending a few minutes reading about pressure cooker lawsuits.

I have lost track of the metaphor, but man pressure cooker lawsuits are more common than I thought.

Is it possible to construct a control system where bad, fast and cheap can become good, fast, and cheap through repeated sampling and a strong spec/eval harness?

I am trying to keep an open mind with AI, but I also have little understanding of control theory, trying to learn.

I would be interested in the broader objective. Was the goal to misrepresent the student population?

Photographers have always had discretion and can present their portfolio as if it were a random sample of an event even if it was actually curated to appeal to a statistical goal. This has been how colleges have lied for years about their demographics.

Is there a local model that can run this?

First they filmed the celebrities, then the politicians, then the cops, then came the ring cameras. It was a slow erosion over decades, the justification drifting from "they are a public figure" to "they are standing near me"

I never knew why the paparazzi could harass celebrities and a few decades later we are all being secretly filmed for a Meta perv database.

I living in a Republican part of the country, I think they believe power is its own morality.

A God that murders people because his feelings got hurt while demanding no one murder, a husband beats his wife and kids because he wasn't respected - these are valid in their moral framework, cruel asymmetrical power structures.

There is a dominant race, a dominant gender, and a dominant country in their view. Laws exist only to control the weak.

These people love Trump because he represents the slave owning, male-dominated, terrorist rebels that form the myth of who we are as a nation. His corruption and enrichment is why they love him.

If someone came up to me and started filming me while I was in public, and then when I got in my car they followed me, I would also call the police.

The double standard demonstrated by Flock isn't the issue, they are the pieces of shit and of course they have no moral consistency.

But "He who fights with monsters should be careful, lest he thereby become a monster." I thought we were united that people have a reasonable sense of temporal privacy in public - that being in public is ephemeral and not some permanent record to be analyzed in perpetuity. We should not be fine stalking people and making them feel threatened, even those that want to build the panopticon state.

Thanks for explaining, I will work on my approach, I didn't think I said anything that presented I agree with or believed the PR, only that it was context for why the A/I situation.

Yes I am well aware of what antifa means.

Excellent job, this was very fun to play.

I liked the explanations, graphics, interactive tesseract, all nice attentions to detail.

How much guidance did you give Astra? Did you give a single prompt, an example site to mimic or was there more to the design and make process?

I charitably assume if something can't be been done on a mobile it is because someone was granted an "on a phone" patent or clicking that button on a phone somehow will entitle Apple to 30% of my revenue stream in perpetuity.

I usually don't attribute it to malice or incompetence from hypothetical devs, instead I blame malice or incompetence from hypothetical lawyers.

I want to mindlessly copy-paste this link to so many people rather than think for myself on how to respond to them.

We need a dontpastethedontpastetheai.com to get ahead of this.

It is hard to find actual data that supports the claim that calling your congressperson matters, mostly the internet is full of anecdata and wishful thinking.

Effective altruism has some data that suggests it works marginally for state leglislators but works quite well for undecided federal officials.

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/5oStggnYLGzomhvvn/...

AI will also make us faster as exploitation, genocide, and weapons manufacturing.

Our technology has long since surpassed our capacity to understand its impact or to morally restrain its use - we've gone from chivalry to "oops, that was a school, oh well"

We will solve problems faster though, but we aren't showing signs that AI is making us better humans, and that is the problem.

I think it is a wonderful time to start a business. Owner-run businesses tend to have great customer service. As consumers, we have some choice to give our attention to businesses where the people doing the work are the ones that own the company, if they aren't, then give your money to someone else. Stop supporting businesses that pay their taxes to Ireland.

This isn't a perfect solution and I know there are counter-examples, but I have been much more satisfied supporting small, local or owner-run shops.

You don't need to build a perfect med spa, you only need to control the patents of the key pieces of a med spa.

This is nothing more thab a prophylactic patent grab to stifle competition and progress in this space for the next decade and/or hoover up patient data behind a paywall where they will gladly lease the weights and bias cure to you own disease back to you in the form of a subscription.

I don't think a person saying Eastern European are observed doing something more than expected is inherently racist. It is a claim he either does or doesn't have evidence for.

If he made the claim with insufficient evidence or made the claim in contradiction of the evidence, then it becomes racist, but I don't think making the observation and doing the calculation is the racist part. It is a simple chi-squared goodness-of-fit test.

From what I could understand from the 6-page memorandum, (my paraphrase) "the law allows us to be nice and convenient, but doesn't require us to be nice and convenient, so we decided to make things hard and cruel going forward"

The current administration is sending a pretty clear message to immigrants.