hollosi

I would not be surprised if it turned out the exact attention mechanism does not really matter, similarly to the sigmoid, ReLU, GELU movement, only the speed on calculation - and QKV is pretty good at that on the GPUs.

Enforcement is the real issue, not the specific red lines, regardless of what Anthropic claims and news outlets repeat.

Verification requires access to classified logs. These logs would attract the spies of the whole world. Even if these logs are in principle for "past actions", in practice past logs (for war games, for example) would compromise future strategy.

Since these manual audits are too risky, the only alternative is to hard-code limits into the AI. But are we ready trust an AI to "judge" a mission and refuse to execute during a crisis?

Anthropic wanted technical enforcement, the Pentagon wanted trust.

It’s a choice between two bad options: an unaccountable military and an unreliable AI kill switch. They are both very dangerous, just in different ways.

Focusing solely on taxes misses the point that most people do not fully utilize "included" baggage allowances on domestic trips, and that is pure profit.

Let's assume a $40 bag fee: $25 cost to handle the bag, $3 tax, $12 profit.

If people pay for the bags separately, in addition to their $220 ticket, they will only pay for utilized bags, so for 1 bag, the profit will be $12.

If the $300 ticket bundle includes 2 allowed bags, but people only check 1 bag, then the profit is: $80 - 2$6 (tax) - 1$25 (cost) = $49 profit, more than 4 times bigger!

The real reason is the comparison sites as the HN commenters pointed out, but the result is not always bad, because the savings is real in many cases as people indeed would only pay for one bag on average ($220+$40 = $260) instead of $300.

I think airlines are much less happy with the separated fees than consumers, but once one airline does it, the others are forced to do it. The same happened with the international trips, which clearly has no tax reason. Many years ago it included 2 pieces of 70-pound bags, then 2 50-pound bags, then 1 50-pound bag, and now in many cases, on basic tickets, nothing at all.

Practically the whole world educates doctors with a 6-year program straight out of high school, out of which 6 years are relevant to medical education, instead of the 8 years in the US, out of which 4 are barely relevant to medical education.

The real question is why the insurance companies are pushing the annual exams very hard, not just in consumer ads, but using lots of incentives for primary care physicians.

One would assume they would not want to pay for unnecessary tests for healthy people.

So either their own research shows they save money with annual checkups in spite of what the article says, or more sinisterly, they do want to spend money to be able to justify higher premiums, because in several states they are required to spend around 80% of the premiums, and this is one easily plannable way.

Does anyone know? Perhaps someone working for an insurance company?

SMS forwarding sends the content, not the sender (phone number) info. In principle, they can search your previous messages and find the sender, but it's unclear if that would raise some privacy issues.

Most likely they just use the reported message to train their spam filter, not to block the particular sender number of that message.

Which is true for most human-generated content, too.

Plummeting sperm counts is a worldwide trend.

On the other hand, people in more industrial countries are exposed to different chemicals (BPA, FPOAs, flame retardants, food additives, etc.), than people in more agrarian countries (field chemicals, like fertilizers and pesticides). These chemicals are all harmful, but it's hard to blame a single class of them for a global problem.

If I had to pick a truly universal issue, I would say childhood and young adult obesity. Surprisingly, obesity is growing rapidly even in countries where hunger is also a problem.

Perl is preinstalled on pretty much every Linux and MacOS since time immemorial, and it's pretty much guaranteed to stay preinstalled for the foreseeable future.

Python3 is up and coming, and eventually it will get there, but old machines must die before it can reach ubiquity.

People like the convenience of having their bookmarks and saved passwords available, so the Incognito mode serves a purpose, it's just not what its name implies. Only its name is a problem, the description on the starter page correctly describes the behavior.

"Guest Mode": (1) hides the identity on the internet, and (2) hides the activity on the local machine.

"Incognito window": (2 only) hides the activity on the local machine.

To clear the confusion, "Incognito mode" should simply be renamed "Ephemeral mode" or "Transient mode" or "No-Save mode".

It's just to emphasize that they may be lenient about some other tickets as long as they are way in the past, but they are not lenient about these ones.

These are reasonable conditions, but apparently they are not easy to pass.

I think the texting while driving is the more interesting one: a bunch of states don't care too much (Arizona, Montana, etc.), some others only impose a small $25 fine, so young people may not think about it as a huge obstacle to a high-paying job much later.

Essentially: no DUI (ever!), no texting while driving (ever!), no tickets in the last 3 years.

Surprisingly low percent of truck drivers can pass this.

Plus, many trucks have a driver-facing camera, no privacy.