niceairport

It isn't a complete model, but it's the best one we've got and the most universally agreed upon.

I know you're joking, but "before" the Big Bang doesn't really make sense.

I can't say I'm surprised, but it's still pretty crazy to think about that it took us 44 years to get an object to a place it takes light less than 24 hours to get to. It feels both pretty far and also not far at all at the same time.

Curious as to how long does it take for the transmission to reach earth. Where can I learn that?

It doesn't seem to work when I paste text. After pasting text into the modal and submitting it prompts me to enter Wavenet API key.

Ah yes, the Simpsons, the source of truth for all things life.

At least the delusion is very real here.

I have mixed feelings between your response and the response you are replying to. One one hand I can clearly see how what you're saying makes sense. On the other, I still am inclined to believe that if you really distilled the actual purpose of everything you mentioned, it could be formulated in a way that doesn't require AGI.

You've explained further proving that the original statement was wrong. Nobody is shooting at anyone.

I think this is a bit of a case of "Why use many word when few word do trick?"

I've had the pleasure of working with an Australian consulting firm - Industrie & Co.

Great people and great experience overall.

I mean to be fair, the opinion expressed in the tweet in question was pretty dumb.

This. I was so sad to find out that despite having a phenomenal CSS support, FF does not (easily) allow to switch off CORS, which makes it impossible for me to use at work.

"The point is that you start to think how your words could be taken, not just assume people magically know your intent"

But where do you draw the line? Is it not reasonable to assume that the intent will be understood when using and extremely common phrase?

I mean your point is fair enough. But I must say that if someone is going to go to the trouble of deconstructing every sentence in search of something to be hurt by then I'm sure they can. Question is though, what's the point of it, when it is pretty clear that it was not the intended meaning? Because obviously in this example it was just used as a metaphore without any insidious meaning behind it. Not unlike the use of master in git or white/ black list, that I've seen discussed in HN a few times in the past months.