mjdv
mjdv on Hacker News
> they cannot control for the willingness to respond to polls at all
Why not? If they poll the same question (e.g. political party) repeatedly (e.g. in many elections) eventually you could build some kind of model of which parties poll-answerers are more likely to skew towards, or how much they shift compared to non-answerers. Not fundamentally a different process from other ways of removing bias from polls.
Apologies, I misunderstood your comment and did not realize it was referring to the original article, rather than its grandparent comment.
Pangram does not work reliably on single, short sentences.
Feature request: I'd like to ride the ferris wheel.
They're scans. Those are human-readable. They probably won't make them available to the public, which is the exact same state they would be in if they bought the books and just put them on a bookshelf in a warehouse.
The thing he "<Did not> refuse to proceed" with was LiMux, his project for moving away from Microsoft.
That seems only fair. ;-)
> eat food, mostly plants, not too much.
If the state of physics was "stuff falls, heat sticks around, light goes fast" I think it'd be fair to describe that as "abysmal".
> FWIW, I think this is the same as saying "iff it is bounded and has finite discontinuities".
It is not: for example, the piece-wise constant function f: [0,1] -> [0,1] which starts at f(0) = 0, stays constant until suddenly f(1/2) = 1, until f(3/4) = 0, until f(7/8) = 1, etc. is Riemann integrable.
"Continuous almost everywhere" means that the set of its discontinuities has Lebesgue measure 0. Many infinite sets have Lebesgue measure 0, including all countable sets.
Until this post it wasn't clear to me that just opening and trusting a directory can cause code to be run without taking any other explicit actions that seem like they might involve running code, like running tests. My bad, but still!
I would say we have a problem when people who write compilers can't read type theory papers, but then our backgrounds might differ. ;-)
> We never talk about it now because we obviously blew past it years ago.
It's shocking to me that (as far as I know) no one has actually bothered to do a real Turing test with the best and newest LLMs. The Turing test is not whether a casual user can be momentarily confused about whether they are talking to a real person, or if a model can generate real-looking pieces of text. It's about a person seriously trying, for a fair amount of time, to distinguish between a chat they are having with another real person and an AI.
Q: Do you play chess?
A: Yes.
Q: I have K at my K1, and no other pieces. You have only K at K6 and R at R1.
It is your move. What do you play?
A: (After a pause of 15 seconds) R-R8 mate.
Rush is the most popular brand of poppers. Maybe you're thinking of those? It's a liquid in a vial, but nothing like MDMA, and definitely older than the 2000s. If not, and there was another drug called Rush sold in a vial, I'll bet that it's caused some unfortunate mix-ups.