tidenly

I think you just stumbled upon a one-off. I've lived here my entire adult life and never encountered this.

I got hayfever on my 3rd year of living here, and it seems like quite a common pattern among immigrants I've noticed. I have hayfever back in the UK too, but I guess I didn't have a Cedar allergy - so it took time to develop.

Idiotic and completely untrue statement.

You get your waist and height measured as part of your routine health examination every year since you become a worker. Eyes, hearing, etc are also included. Its just your body's "metrics".

Your company CAN look at these (they rarely care to), but they can't fire you for them - you especially aren't fined over it. Japan is an incredibly hard country to fire or penalize workers. They can only check them in the first place because its the company that pays for these screenings in most cases. Free EKG, blood screens, and other basic health marker checks.

I'm so tired of people spreading orientalist crap about this country on the internet.

While it's true a lot of people (particularly white Americans who've never experienced being a minority) will complain about minor things like just being treated differently, there are some obvious issues like housing discrimination, where you can be a incredibly high earner with a stable job, living in Japan for decades, and still be told no just because you're a foreigner. (To be fair, I think discriminating on visa length, time in Japan so far, income, job type is perfectly fine - just no reason to outright say no to all foreigners)

Small town living is kind of a different kettle of fish though. There can be lots of committees, local rules and association fees you're expected to take part in. Lots of these aren't really forced or regulated "by law", but someone from there is just expected to play into them. Lots of younger Japanese people and foreigners move there, learn about these and find them unbearable -and if you don't play ball you can be treated badly.

In rural areas though the main thing for foreigners is that you'll kind of become a town character "foreigner-san". Kind of unavoidable when you're the only foreign face many of these people will have ever met.

I think some foreigners have this dream if they assimilate enough people will just pretend they're not a foreigner anymore, which personally I think is unrealistic and silly - you are foreign. The truly happy people here find a way to integrate while coming to peace with the fact they're obviously different.

I left the UK after graduating at 21, fully intending to come back within a couple of years. Its weird watching it from the outside for 10 years waiting for a "good time" to move back and realizing that time isn't coming more and more each year.

The salaries in Japan arent great honestly, but mine, the quality of life and how far my money goes is so much better than if I lived back at the UK. Every time I go back it seems more and more people are struggling to pay for basic expenses - and even if I moved back it seems get a great salary I'd have to live in London, which I dislike.

I imagine lots of people far more talented than me must also be feeling the pull to not stay in the country too. Its festering politically and economically. Besides family there really is no benefit to remaining.

The variance for most traits is higher within races than it is between them. I assume OPs point is the division into categories "black, white, asian, latino" is arbitrary, and you could easily reduce or add more groups as you see fit. Theres nowhere in science you can look that will tell you how many groups there are and where to draw the lines between them - i.e a construct.

From an also non-USian.

Does that have any legal basis? It sounds a lot like what Google did for their Java engine, which essentially rewrote the entire engine with the same APIs, while referencing the original source code. Didn't the courts decide it was fine?

A lot of people dislike LLMs and generative AI (fairly) and are reflexively trying to reach for tools in our legal framework, claiming it's obviously already illegal. I don't think this is going to work. Generative AI is quite obviously novel to anyone who isn't in denial - and claiming existing copyright laws are going to cover it seems like a lost cause.

We need new laws. Especially regarding deepfakes, it's shocking how many people think revenge porn laws and such are going to be enough here. Rather than just focusing on the data usage, we need more fundamental laws and rights, like the right to control representations of ourselves, like Japan has, where producing images or voice/video in your likeness is prosecutable straight out. Likewise we need laws that explicitly target data use for training that is separate to copyright.

The way LLMs are trained is obviously too similar to how humans learn, and the transformation and then output produce works that are novel based on that "learning", just like humans do. This is so fundamentally different to what copyright laws were made to cover, I find it infuriating how many people handwave these arguments away. Only in perfect 1-to-1 regurgitation does it even feel close to something copyright would be able to cover.

I used to be one of these and honestly I'm so tired of Google as a company lately I'm really considering jumping over to Apple's ecosystem.

Google just have an incredibly weak product team, across both hardware and software.

Only slightly related, I have a really bad thing with dental dams, clamps, and anything blocking my mouth - I get really paranoid im going to choke and die - and start overthinking swallowing my saliva and freaking out. Especially taking the moulds for my teeth, it really feels like the back of my throat is getting blocked up by the putty, and they just leave me sitting there with it in.

My dentist would always lie to me saying "just a little longer left" (even when there was about an hour remaining) which really didnt help, and after we finished about 5 teeth worth of treatments she said she "realised" I have 3 more places she wants to do as well..

It sounds hysterical I'm sure, but I dont think she realised that several times per each treatment I'm genuinely convinced I'm about to die - like making peace with god level. I got over myself and was in a really good cycle of going because I wanted to finally fix everything, and then that extra "reveal" of another 2 rounds of treatment just broke me, I couldn't do it.

I thought after you take estrogen long enough you don't have to take t blockers or fin anyway? Once your body see's you have enough sex hormone doesn't it naturally stop T, even if the hormone is estrogen? (Sorry for the stupid question)

Sorry to rant a little, but as someone who grew up with HIV in the family, this odd pressure against people who might be hesitant to sleep with someone U=U always feels uncomfortable and manipulative to me. I see it a lot around the internet.

The way I was raised, I'm the only person I trust with my sexual health. I would never trust someones word they're tested recently and have unprotected sex with them. I wouldn't trust someone saying they're on PrEP and have unprotected sex with them either. I can only trust myself. U=U is exactly the same situation.

In a zero trust mindset like that, someone telling me they're U=U only tells me they have HIV. I have HIV+ friends who struggle to take their meds at the right time every day, or forget. And I also know people who have lied about when they last took their STI screening to hookups.

I'm also sure a bunch of people would get angry if you asked a U=U person to show you their latest CD4 count or viral load proof too - so what am I to do, just trust that, unlike everyone else, U=U people are perfectly honest, and never screw up taking their meds?

The response to this is often "anyone COULD have HIV, U=U people are actually safer because they have it locked down", but again to me this is about as trustworthy as "anyone COULD have HIV, but people on PrEP have it locked down". It all relies on the trust the other person is on top of their shit.

I wonder to what extent is hallucination a result of a "must answer" bias?

When sampling data all over the internet, your data set only represents people who did write, did respond to questions - with no representation of what they didn't. Add into that confidently wrong people - people who respond to questions on, say, StackOverflow, even if they're wrong, and suddenly you have a data set that prefers replying bullshit, because there's no data for the people who didnt know the answer and wrote nothing.

Inherently there's no representation in the datasets of "I don't know" null values.

LLMs are forced to reply, in contrast, so they "bullshit" a response that sounds right even though not answering or saying you don't know would be more appropriate - because no-one does that on the internet.

I always assumed this was a big factor, but am I completely off the mark?

Im guessing they used all those credits to set up those instances, but never took the extra step to add log ingestion or any kind of monitoring. Unique constraint violations peaking should have at least sent some kind of mail or slack notification a few hours after release (putting aside the "it didnt happen during the day because we push to prod several times daily" - which is insane in its own right).

Nothing here really sounds like GPTs fault to me. The issue is something that could easily have been done by a human and missed in PR.

Can you give an example of this? Laravel is very modular - you don't have to use it all if you want to call out to something more complex.

I've seen this take quite a lot around Twitter recently, which is confusing to me. Do you read Her as a "AI assistants are bad" story? I thought it was a much more subtle exploration of what our world would be like if such things existed, rather than outright condemning it, but it seems like lots of people saw only horror start to finish.

I feel like the pacing was awful, and especially as its Netflix, I don't even trust they'll finish it. I really dug all the SF stuff, but the human drama aspect of it really ate a lot of time.

(spoilers)

- So much time was spent on the cancer story, only for it to lead no-where. Especially toward the end of the show, increasingly more time was spent with the characters doing nothing and sitting about, still refusing the call to action. It was bizarre seeing there were only 2 episodes left to go, and still no-one was doing anything or even really caring.

- The video game was odd. I'm supposed to believe only advanced scientists can solve it, but actually only one of the levels seemed to be solved with actual science. The rest were just deductions about the society - I really doubt many people would struggle passing through it.

- After the reveal that it is aliens, the show seems to just wander about not knowing what to do with itself. Only the reveals about the cult are really consequential after that, and when it's all revealed you're basically spent just following this rocket story that only 1 character really cares about. Again everything takes too long here too.

- The show didn't seem to care about the interpersonal relationships of the characters at all, but then toward the end spent an insane amount of time forcing us to watch them. The actors couldn't sell it, and the script was bad too. The show only really shone during the sci-fi stuff, but drips it out at a snails pace.

- The ending was silly and didn't land for me. My boyfriend and I laughed at the head going off course because it was just so bizzare, especially as the show had forced us to sit through the the pondering and fake in-fighting about the decision to choose the cancer guy as the candidate. What was it all for?!

- The ship nano-wire scene was insane. Like an amazing sequence we were "holy shit!"ing our way through. But after it all happened and the ship is utterly destroyed it's like.. was I really meant to believe this was better than a missile to disarm it and swatting the place?

The article touches on this at the end, but every time I've tried to jump over to a dumbphone, I've always been stopped by one thing - lack of messenger services.

Maybe in America where these messenger apps are less prevalent its less of a problem, but in Japan not having access to Line, Instagram Messenger and Whatsapp would basically remove all ways for anybody to contact me.

It's not some sacrifice I can just accept for a digital detox either - texting is the main way people keep in touch nowadays. It would basically remove the entire purpose of having a phone at all.

Ironically this blog feels like it was written by an SEO bot. There's basically no meat to what it's saying and spends each paragraph rephrasing the title without adding anything.

That's not true though because most decision and execution processes in Japan are daisy chained. One person can't just make you send a tonne of money because you'd normally have to forward it onto someone else, who clears it with someone else, and then we all sign a ringisho.

The daisy chaining prevents single responsibility stuff like this.

Also for what it's worth I've done verification callbacks to every single one of my bosses at some point during my career here and no-one's ever questioned it.

The regulation allows for apple to still do malware scanning and blocking on apps installed even by third party stores. Google also does the same thing, this point is a nothingburger. The human review part of the app store review does nothing to catch viruses.

Crazily enough, the domain shown under the ad on google ads isn't automatically pulled. You can set it manually.

Attackers exploit this by first using a genuine domain to get the ad approved, and then altering the info after the campaign starts. I saw a similar attack like this on twitter a month or so ago.

Unless the battery is seriously improved I wouldn't pay it much mind. The pixel watch is one of my biggest purchase regrets and basically just sits off on my arm as an accessory.

"decentralized" isnt necessary to a block chain. However when people say "block chain" in everyday use, they're usually talking about that type. It's a case where the everyday use of a word is different to the actual technical meaning.

I'm wondering the same thing too. I have tried multiple monitor setups dozens of times now, but always end up coming back to a single display. I can't imagine having a tonne of widgets floating around my work space in 3D is going to do anything positive for my productivity.

Have you never corrected your phones autocorrect before? That's what they're referring to.

Just a note on the amendment at the end: Storing hashes of passwords is the industry standard - but on the server side, not on the client. Even if some other key is derived from the original password, in the end that thing is going to have to be passed as-is for authentication and will need to be stored somewhere.

If you look in your apple keychains, lastpass, browser saved passwords, all of those data are viewable in plaintext on your machine.

Maybe it could be argued the password shouldn't be stored in plaintext on the storage, so it would have to be decrypted during runtime to get the original plaintext password back again. This does add some security, but only takes someone dedicated enough to pull out the decryption source from the application to get around it.

Honestly though, with no theory of mind or consciousness you have no way to assert in either direction.

To borrow the religion analogy, there's the opposite fallacy of claiming the negative case "I know for a fact God isn't real", by stating you know what these kinds of information processing systems are doing fundamentally cannot yield intelligence or some kind of consciousness.

I mean we can only speak for our own bubbles.

I live in Tokyo and most of my friends (20s) have some kind of automation in their apartments, mostly using Alexa or Google Home. Again, just another bubble, but its not all Silicon Valley.

>If AI becomes an incredible tool, it will an incredibly bad one, used mainly for replacing humans in most jobs and removing our reliance on each other, promoting narcissism and selfish behaviour.

Ridiculous, you have absolutely no way of knowing how this will all play out. I'm certain AI could create a lot of instability in the job market, but there's no reason to think our economy won't evolve as it always has in the past to match.