wredcoll

This is what I want more information on, especially before we start pitchforking ubuntu or whoever

> 2. Anthropic says it built a working exploit that gets root on a server.

Is there any independent verification of this?

I think there's something to this, but also you've got to think about the cultural standards where "female" is considered "abnormal".

e.g. you have "toys" and "girl toys". "clothes" and "girl clothes" and such. It's not everywhere or everything but there is a trend.

Texas property taxes are effectively regressive. Not a great model to copy.

This is somewhat tangential but speaking of ai benchmarks, I want to see one benchmarkes against passing those "filelocker" websites used for illicit downloads.

You know, the kind with 50+ ads on the page and 8 of them say download and you have to click it 5 times to get past the ads then do that on two more pages?

I mean, I wouldn't object to having fun while doing it, but I'm pretty sure anything people would use an example of "fun" would massively increase the danger to me and everyone around me.

I had to disable sleep mode on my windows desktop because half the time it wouldn't wake up again.

Windows is rock solid?

I mean, this is 100% "no true scotsman". It feels like we're more or less peaking with the current algorithms for making llms but people are going to figure out how to usd them more effectively and you just won't notice the gen-ai effects.

Right now you have failsons like musk bragging about his terrible "one shot" short films but people who use them with more subtly and with actual skill will just look like anything else being produced.

Trump is globally famous for lying. It's possibly his most well known attribute? What's the argument here?

Hey remember when we had a 2 (plus?) Year trial over whether or not the president had sex with someone other than his wife? Something about family values or morality or whatever they said at the time?

God I am tired of this argument.

What you're saying is that "we" shouldn't enforce the law because "they" will break the law in response.

Aside from being inherently morally bankrupt, they'rw already breaking the law.

Eh, owning the supreme court helps a lot. It moves pretty quickly when it needs to protect trump.

Tell me more about how "the sides" are reducing "common ground"?

> The true shame is on the congressional republicans for letting him sully them so deeply and follow him in his self immolation of the entire government and America

This is the problem when your entire identity and principles boil down to "doing what the social superior tells you to".

What?

If you work for ubicloud, I have a question: do you sell api access to kimi/etc, and if so, where is that listed??

Right? If they had lost that copyright lawsuit, openai would have stopped existing.

Of course presumably chinese models would keep existing and that gets a little weird.

Publishing "objectively rigorous science" is great. That's why we have several hundred science journals publishing (theoretically) peer-reviewed articles.

Scientific American should do this. It should also talk about how and why and by who the science is done, because that is how you IMPROVE THINGS.

Every single time someone complains that something is "political" what they actually mean is that it is questioning the status quo.

Guess what, the status quo is also the result of politics. Whatever the exact system and framework we have at this moment is not some kind of "natural universal default" that just happened to come into existence.

People created it. Thousands of people made millions of choices to get us to where we are, and guess what, that is politics.

Pretending none of that happened or that nothing should change is just ... cowardly.

> Political content masquerading as science

I don't know how else to explain this. Politics matters because science is done by people and everything people do is, at some level, political. Who gets funding, how much funding, who works with each other, what gets published, what gets studied, this is all politics.

And if we want the best science to be done, we need to understand why and how these decisions get made, and by whom.

Yes? That's why I said "sometimes"? Are you trying to tell me that every single scientific american article focused entirely why people did things?

Or, maybe, perhaps, they did it sometimes.

I ran into that idea the other day and I thought it was pretty interesting, although I'd phrase it slightly differently:

"Rome's tradition of having to serve in 'lower offices' before the higher ones meant that when aristocrats inevitably ended up in charge of entire armies they had some level of practical experience and learnings to draw on while commanding".

But yes, much is made of Rome's redundancy in terms of military strength and there's a lot of states during that period that had A King who did everything and then died in a battle and then everything collapsed.

The most commonly repeated pattern across literally all of human history is that power grows.

Being the chief executive in a system like brazil's results in a lot of power, for several perfectly good reasons, but it does mean you have to build in safe guards against that power growing.

Regular elections are good, but not sufficient, as a study of recent world history would demonstrate.

And the original comment was the "median price of $4k".

Right? I was there. My family had a tv. We didn't not spend the equivalent price of a honda civic on it.

> The price of the median purchased TV in 1997 was ~$4000, in nominal (1997) dollars

I'm sorry, what? How does this pass the sniff test? Are you saying people spent four thousand 1997 dollars for a tv? Or the equivalent of $4000 of 2026 dollars? Either way, that is extremely high and 1997 was not that long ago.

What substance?

> Yes, they do.

No they don't. What is this, a school yard?

Trying to draw an equivalence between the two or their supporters is incredibly disingenuous verging on dishonest.

Trump is a convicted rapist. Trump is legally prohibited from running a charity because of the massive fraud he committed. Trump is on tape bragging about sexual assault and committing fraud.

Trump has rallies while he's the freaking president. Trump attempts to discredit news agencies in general by repeating slander remarkably similar to that used by literal hitler.

I could go on, but the point has been made.

Is there any study/survey of how many people even own a monitor?

> If you listen to MAGA talk about Trump, or liberals talk about Bidden, you know that this is widespread.

what a bizarre comparison. Nobody worships Biden or defends his every gaffe or sanewashes his rambling speeches.

Is there a named fallacy for this false idea that because one thing is bad there must be an equally bad opposite side or something?

That's literally what they just said??