nick49488171

I'm not a psychopath but how are we supposed to fix the deficit without something like DOGE that can cut programs.

Authoritarian?

The gyroscope and battery should not be getting exposed without permission. That seems unexpectedly invasive, and I'm in tech.

Also we should disable referrer field.

The interface is great for what it does though. I still use ti-83 interface with the calculator app on my phone.

My brand new Pixel phone several years back, I was so excited it was IP68. Took some photos splashing around in water, not more than a foot or two. It died in minutes.

That would have been absolutely horrible

No probably not

Eventually we will rediscover the Harvard Architecture for LLMs.

Arc AGI 4 can be Chip's Challenge!

I would make the same argument about bicycles then. What is the point of spending taxpayer money providing services for such a dangerous activity?

Changing the topic again. Have a nice life, troll.

The counter argument is this: if the chance of dying is 2% to make a historic mission, then people should be able to make that choice. What's your counterargument to this statement?

As for your hazards Microgravity can be counteracted with a centrifugal living environment.

Radiation can not be mitigated effectively yet other than throwing mass at the problem. But if someone wants to launch enough mass that's on them.

I was not arguing about the hazards of space travel. Of course it is hazardous. I dislike the article because his conclusion is more dangerous to society than any hazardous activity: "something is dangerous therefore nobody should do it." And he makes no arguments to support this conclusion.

Fixed pie fallacy.

"Space travel is bad for your health and here's what we know about it" is actually a fine article. It's his concluding statement that is contemptible.

"Space may be fascinating, wonderful, and exciting, but most of all, it is incredibly dangerous. As far as human space travel goes, it’s probably best that it stays in the realm of science fiction, at least for the foreseeable future."

How about letting explorers, informed adults, and risk takers make their own decisions.

About as dangerous as climbing Everest. So we definitely shouldn't do that either, in case these pearl clutching anti-progress journalists experience emotional discomfort.

You can start by comparing "doctor" care vs "doctor who also uses AI" care

One would assume

Probably because at that time, normal people weren't rolling off the back of a massive inflationary period where they can no longer afford to look forward to having enough money to buy/use/participate in whatever cool new technology arises.

Agreed. Huge annoyance when looking for routes on MountainProject as one example.

Seems like an opportunity to condense the context into 'documentation' level and only load the full text/code for files that expect to be edited?

For us mere mortals, how fast does a normal developer for through a MTok. How about a good power user?

Not your weights, not your agent

Maybe xAI/Tesla, Meta, Palantir

Just like AI, the winners will (continue to) be the ones with the most access to data and the technical and financial capital to make use of it.

He's going for number 7 it seems

Screenshot of the top 3 results on Google shopping ought to do it

With a non-sequential generative approach perhaps the RAM cache misses could be grouped together and swapped on a when available/when needed prioritized bases.

China is capitalist on a state level, that's where they are winning. The US lets things get mired in red tape and special interests because nobody wants to take responsibility for growth.

In China, I imagine that if your company does something relevant to the five year initiative then you get a lot of red tape cut for you.

You can always put a blank plate over the old one and save yourself a mess of plastering.