throwaway287391
throwaway287391 on Hacker News
Huh, it would never have occurred to me to raise the objection "but someone could steal the bus while the driver is in the bathroom!" Why does the bus need to stay in neutral with a special system of daily rotating PINs, rather than having the driver take their key to the bathroom with them?
> Kalshi handed him equity worth roughly $300,000 when he joined as a strategic adviser in early 2025. ... Kalshi granted him the stake when the company was valued at under $2 billion — less than a tenth of its $22 billion valuation in a funding round last month ...
Um, how does a $300K stake at an "under $2 billion" valuation become "worth billions" with a 10-50x valuation increase?
(Disclaimer: I'm not defending the Trump family in any way, the administration has been absurdly and blatantly corrupt.)
Could you explain this? I understand that for things like emissions regulations on cars, where it’s very expensive to invest R&D and production capacity into different SKUs for different markets. I can’t see why it would help in other markets in this case though (beyond potentially inspiring similar regulations elsewhere).
I'd think it's only maybe 5-10% of customers at most who both use desktop over mobile to get their boarding pass and use an ad-blocker on desktop. And honestly I don't remember ever seeing an ad (even on Ryanair) when getting my boarding pass on mobile. OTOH I distinctly remember seeing many giant ads on printed boarding passes, most often on printed boarding passes brandished by other customers (usually printed in full color!). I'd think that's hugely more valuable as advertising real estate than the iota of additional data they get to collect on a few adblock users who have been forced to use mobile.
Either way, I stand by my main complaint about Ryanair letting late arrivers jump the queue even if I only have to "suffer" from it when I'm checking bags.
Somehow I doubt the compliance rate is anywhere near 99.9% -- that's roughly 1 passenger breaking the rules every 5 flights? Would they really be investing so much (including having the CEO spend time on air to rant) in catching the delinquents if that's the scale of the problem?
As someone who mostly follows the rules, the thing that really bothers me about Ryanair and the like are, I'll get to the airport at least 2 hours early as I'm supposed to, and then there'll be a massive hour+ long check-in queue (which I have to wait in just to show my passport, even if I'm not checking bags, since online check in never seems to work when I need to enter passport info), and all the while they'll have staff shouting "Anyone going to <destination of flight that closes boarding in 20-30 minutes>?" and shepherding those passengers to the front of the queue. It irritates me to no end -- why the hell should I bother arriving early if I'm just going to be punished with a longer wait for it?
Maybe a tiresome pedantic response, but this is only a "mistake" to the same extent that it was a mistake for [everyone in the world who had the required funds] not to buy 100 BTC in 2015. If you can overcome the cognitive biases (endowment effect, loss aversion, etc.), the fact that you previously owned the 100 BTC has no real bearing on the situation, beyond transaction fees and a couple hours max saved by holding (doing nothing) vs. buying.
I suppose it's "fair" since it's published on the Apple website with the authors' Apple affiliations, but historically speaking, at least in ML where publication is relatively fast-paced and low-overhead, academic papers by small teams of individual researchers have in no way reflected the opinions of e.g. the executives of a large company. I would not be particularly surprised to see another team of Apple researchers publishing a paper in the coming weeks with the opposite take, for example.
I would've thought one major issue is that a much larger chunk of tax revenue is collected by the IRS than by any state. From googling, CA has the highest state income tax rate but still collects <5% of US federal tax revenue, while having >10% of the population. ~2.5x'ing state taxes to attain similar per-capita revenue would probably lead to a fair number of people leaving the state, or at least get the party who passed that tax hike (presumably Democrats) voted out in the next state election.
OTOH the NSF annual budget is $10B/year, in theory "easily" fundable by CA alone with its $220B/year in tax revenue, in the worst case with a 5% tax increase. The NSF isn't the only federal agency that funds research (seems to provide around 25% of federal research funding) but it is probably enough for one state, even the most productive one. So maybe it really is doable.
Amazon Prime 4K HDR on the other hand looks like garbage on every platform I've used -- the compression is unbearable in any dark scene.
[0] Although PyTorch arguably encompasses 2 levels, with both a pure functional library like the JAX API, as well as a "neural network" framework on top of it. Whereas JAX doesn't have the latter and leaves that to separate libraries like Flax.
But I'm glad you pointed that out, I now suspect that is responsible for a large part of the disagreement between "huh? a statistically significant blind evaluation is a statistically significant blind evaluation" vs "oh, this was obviously a terrible study" repliers is due to different interpretations of that post. Thanks. I genuinely didn't consider the alternative interpretation before.
It passed in the House 352-65, and in the Senate 79-18, both in April 2024.
If Apple/Google don't change their minds, TikTok won't be able to get any new US users, and won't be able to distribute updates to current US users. To continue using it in the current state, US users will have to keep the same phone and TikTok will have to continue supporting whatever last version(s) they're on indefinitely. (Modulo the few that might jump through VPN and app store locale setting hoops.)
And I don't see how Apple/Google could change their minds: the ban bill comes with a 5 year statute of limitations, so regardless of how convincing the Trump administration is in their promise not to enforce the law, the next administration inaugurated in January 2029 would still be able to impose the penalties on Apple/Google for 4 years of non-compliance. Those penalties would be cripplingly massive even for the world's largest companies (I'm reading an estimate of $850B [0]).
As far as I can tell, the only events that could end this are (1) TikTok finding and agreeing to sell to a US buyer or (2) Congress overturning the ban.
It's odd that people are talking as though the saga is over now...
[0] https://www.theverge.com/2025/1/19/24347325/tiktok-service-p...
highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work
But I guess the "as we have traditionally understood it" bit from Sam's phrasing may imply that in fact he means something other than OpenAI's own definition?
It would've been more consistent to call it e.g. "5-shot w/ CoT@32" in that case, but I guess there's only so much you can squeeze into a table.