janef0421

That would obviously depend on how much you want to maintain your visa.

Developing technology to improve audio quality would be useless, but improving the vinyl manufacturing process to reduce cost and increase capacity would be worthwhile, as it could expand adoption.

The pregnant man emoji exists mainly due to the flexibility of the zero-width joiner and systems implementing it, not any political reason.

That sounds incredibly unsafe.

E-bikes are quite close to what you are describing, and are already remarkably popular.

I don't think most people see car commuting as a luxury. It's very stressful.

This seems poorly argued. There's a lot of emphasis on technical minutiae, but the question is whether the way the model embeds and reproduces the features of the input images infringes on copyright. I would think that is more dependent on the capabilities and functions of the models, not the specific mechanism of implementation.

Also, the Jevon's paradox bit is a tangent. AI image tools may become widespread, and their use may expand the art market, benefitting artists who make use of them. That is not a relevant point, because the lawsuit is not about the legality of image-generated neural networks; It is about whether using an unlicensed image to train such a model infringes on its copyright. If it was found that it does, then AI art could still transform the art market; All that would change would be that images would need to licensed for training.

Oh, definitely. Just making the counterpoint.

That's worse. If companies are unable to adjust salaries to match increases in overall costs without fulfilling their primary purpose, then it suggests that the entire economic system is dysfunctional.

If 'Oumuamua is a probe, it appears that it would be a fairly simple one. To a sufficiently advanced civilisation, it would probably be relatively low-cost. If an alien civilisation has a reasonable degree of curiosity, sending a cheap probe to examine another star system is likely worthwhile.

Swift only uses reference counting when working with objects; Structs are optimised using copy-on-write. There's currently work on implementing move and ownership semantics, similar to Rust, but opt-in rather than by default.

I think this is probably two far to one side. It is true that naming something purely descriptively may lead to misconceptions as its function evolves, but a "cute" name doesn't do anything to inform someone what it is. I would argue that best name has some semantic connection to the function, but is also somewhat abstracted; This allows it to be informative while accommodating evolution.

Every system has required most people to do work, but the character of work in the modern era is qualitatively different from the typical character of work throughout history.

I'm actually saying that I don't think having a debate about the nature of the Russian government on the internet would be a productive use of my time.

I think our analyses of the Russian state are based on such fundamentally different premises that we will never come to any meaningful agreement, and further discussion is pointless.

Speculation is inherent to geopolitical strategy.

Gone up in the short term, but likely to fall in the long-term.

Yes, but doing that by undermining nuclear is a poor strategic move. It would leave Russia with no fallback strategy in the case that Europe did cease fossil fuels imports, and would undermine export of nuclear technology to other regions.

At present, yes, but those revenues are threatened by climate change, while Rosatom's revenues are likely to expand for the same reason.

I find this dismissive. The majority of people who desire creative fulfilment can't do that as a primary occupation, but it's still a perfectly reasonable desire. Our society should provide more opportunity for creative fulfilment outside of the culture industry, such as by reducing work hours and creating more outlets for amateur and semi-professional performance, such as community theatre.

Why would Russia promote anti-nuclear disinformation? The Russian state-owned entity Rosatom is a major exporter of nuclear technology, so doing that would be against Russia's interests.

Mastodon isn't a platform, it's a protocol, and all reputable instances block that sort of content.

I think contextual targeting is perfectly sufficient for most advertisers.

That population movement occurred during the early modern period through the Industrial Revolution, after the medieval period.

That's not a bad idea, but it would only work if people were not dependent on income from employment to meet their basic needs. Also, the way you phrase it is a bit extreme. Failure is an opportunity for learning, and it's hard to make a major accomplishment if your work is mostly routine.

Also, that is for acute radiation. Humans, and most other animals, appear to be far more resilient to continuous exposure to lower levels of radiation, which is the more common outcome for a major nuclear power accident.

Ice cream and milkshakes are perfectly fine deserts. One simply shouldn't eat too much desert.

Supervised models would also require a lot more human labour, and the goal of most machine learning projects is to achieve cost-savings by eliminating human labour.

This seems overly focused on novel technologies, which I think is a grave mistake. Humans have been developing technology for millennia, and many of these technologies would be very useful in the modern age. For instance, the Persians created wind cooling towers, which can be used to effectively cool indoor spaces without using large amounts of energy.

I think it's more that people lack the skill and time to reapply such coatings and there are no commercial services that do so.