kmacdough

In theory, there is no reason it can't scale indefinitely using something similar to IP. It's already a self-building network. The hard part is how you incentivise transit nodes. Currently that's what ISPs and backbones provide. They are incentivised to interconnect because that's their core business model. So a truly decentralized Internet requires a decentralized incentive system.

This would enable circumvention, but it's also pretty easy to triangulate radio signals, so it's fairly easy for a belligerent organization to track that someone is sending something.

It's not the ugly design choices that make it popular. It's just that it was the first that did a decent job of being easy to read/write. Even if you write an objectively better language, you can't replace the ecosystem of libraries, education material and human support that comes with popularity. Popularity begets popularity, and since ease of use is the selling point, it's probably never going to practical to replace it as a general purpose go-to for beginners. And where people begin, they tend to stay. So instead we slowpy march on, bearing the burdens of original sin.

And it's a reality check that we live in a surveillance state. To a degree that most people find appalling, but the government is good enough at suppressing public awareness enough to cause an outcry.

It's also not whataboutism, the comment specifically wondered how else were being surrupticously tracked without our knowledge. This is a concrete example and I think many would be surprised such tracking also exists outside the digital realm.

No it's not ok, and most people are horrified when they learn. It's just a reality check that we've lived in a surveillance state for quite a while and it's time we take a stand. And a reminder that the government has done a good job of suppressing these realities from public awareness.

Your printer has been doing this for decades. There's an invisible-to-human dot matrix pattern that encodes things like model, serial number and i don't remember what else.

I think you probably just don't like to stretch.

Can you share the source? This seems dangerously wrong.

I see a specific review making the very narrow claim that it can have detrimental effects on power/strength activities immediately following static stretching.

But by and large I'm finding a great deal of evidence for a wide range of other benefits, particularly in range of motion and injury prevention. I can't find anything widely damning, and I certainly don't see any reviews contesting the validity of the very vast body of research supporting the many benefits of static stretching.

Its not about geometry, it's a parallel compute thing thing. CPUs typically don't have more than 10 or 20 cores. GPU have 100s to 1000s.

Matmul is very well parallelized. More, lower power cores will always pay off handsomely.

The problem is simple: qualified immunity has become a blank check. The officer can simply claim they didn't know the law. They somehow can't be expected to understand basic constitutional protections.

The government is not a monolith. Being owned by the city doesn't have to mean the cops are in control. The municipality can determin by law exactly who operates the infrastructure, who has access to what, what process they must follow, and how that all will be monitored and enforced. "The government didn't handle this well, therefore they can't be trusted for anything like it again" is a misunderstanding of how governments are constructed and how power can be separated between legislatively mandated structures. Find the source of the abuse, then build a structure to check that abuse.

Sold as learning, but that was a marketing term, not a technical one. From a technical perspective, the LLM is not learning. Only reacting based on its original training.

You might argue that the systems we've built around them are learning in a way, as they strategically condense and save artifacts from past interactions to pass into the LLMs context. But the LLM itself, which is the source of the intelligence, is not learning. It remains entirely unchanged throughout inference. This difference may seem trite, but it has significant impacts over the long term behavior.

Context is not the same as learning. It's easy to conflate because they're tightly coupled in our brains.

The underlying structure and tuning of the LLM are entirely unchanged by context. It merely affects the attention and activation of the network. The LLM will not be able to work with this hypothetical new language unless it is in context. This does not fit the computational meaning of learning.

Smart is not a well defined term. Nor is it's general idea formally understood. Use it freely, but you won't be saying anything meaningful unless you define your usage.

Unfortunately doesn't cover scrolling HN while the agent toils away.

With a striking lack of numbers, I'm not confident. I my experience, everything underspecified in a marketing release is unflattering. They're also not a chip designing company, but they're probably trying to keep up on the eyes of investors. As the article mentions, several of their competitors are chip designers and already have working procuction inference chips.

Right, but the entire damn point is privacy protections enable people to be more honest. The entire point is supposed to be good data so we can make informed population wide decisions.

And race is a pretty big one under the current administration which has had hundreds of legal immigrants arrested for weeks to months off of "suspicion" that for lack of concrete evidence could only amount to racial profiling.