wjnc

What a wise reflection and a powerful concept of 'moral accounting' as something to not hold on to. The Tao of Pooh has left my hands seconds ago. The 1983 paperback first edition, with yellow pages than smell of sweet old paper. Thank you for reminding me of that gem.

The thing with loss and emotional maturing is that it is a long and painful process. To try to answer the question "Should a medical diagnosis reshape the past?":

Yes, for all the love you have. Let it. Even if it's false. Narratives that help you find peace and understanding are what you need. Think deeply on that the position of the father /might/ be right, but even false can be a wise position. It is so unlikely that a mother held her child and not loved the child fully and with the intention to raise it right. Circumstances (medical, life, ...) can get in the way. But hold on to that intention.

And we have to be honest: both agents will misuse users and the other way around. So you are asking Anthropic for a backing that will also get stress test by meatspace. I do like the idea: a prepaid or restricted amount credit card for agentic purposes, with the novelty being that amounts above threshold have some kind of protection within consumer law.

Thank you for your time and knowledge.

Would you mind sharing some more of the why it is still an open problem? (I know I know little about this subject.) I understand satellite positioning isn't definitive and did not suggest it should be the /primary/ risk mitigating factor. But even as a tertiary or lower risk mitigating factor, this would have been a worthwhile investment. (Sorry for the bleak introduction of economics.)

And some problems are just _open_ to outside looks. My assistant tells me that the room for error in trains on one dimension ('left - right') is mere 10s of centimeters. I understand that problem. But what track you are on, isn't that obvious to the human in the cabin? (Again, simplifying, not flaming. Production ready safety is _hard_.) So could a vision based solution help count tracks from left to right? (Assistant: "US PTC, on about 54,000 route-miles, uses GPS for the lead locomotive plus crew-entered track information and switch position".) So you use the dimension that matters most in crashes (forwards / backwards) from satellite, augmented with vision or human based left-right positioning. Some trains already have sensors to sense things like leaves on the track to adjust speeding and braking... So the sensor based approach is already there.

Perhaps I am read as suggesting that the problem is easy, and that is not my intention. But for cars this was solved decades ago for routing and years ago for self-driving. I use that daily. Flying is organised with a very clear 6 sigma approach. Crashes are nearly always situations where events / risks stack. Trains (in Spain)...?

Tl;dr - Safety is a function of (human; process; technology) and there is clearly something lacking for trains, when compared to other types of transport.

I would argue that we should look at systems-level explanations. The human factor is so glaring we can get caught up in it. There are what, 50?, high speed trains in movement in Spain at the same time. Even GPS + Starlink + 1 monitor (is that 50k€?) could have prevented this. But it happened, and the question is what is going on with train security in Spain in general for people to (be able to) make such decisions.

Forgive me for trying it out on you:

“Er trinkt heute Kaffee, sonst trinkt er nur Tee.”

As a non-native speaker of both English and German, I feel a little difference in usage. I liked this bit of slop:

‘The most significant nuanced departure is that "sonst" can mean "normally," "usually," or "in general," contrasting a specific event against a baseline of normality. "Else" cannot do this.’

There is an etymological root to ‘sonst’ that is also the root of English ‘thus’. The German explanation would fit well in this story (but indeed no evidence presented).

Can I just add that this commercial website is great. It's informative. It has lots of information. It's very clear to read. And the blog just breathes loving the product.

This being /u/jacquesm would imply it is kinder to assume him having that setup than claiming to have that setup.

I am placing your time of digital fruition in the 00’s or later? Not bashing, but we bought floppies in the 80s with software with no updates. Cool kids got their software from Oh No More Warez + keygen in the early 90s. That went online in the late 90s.

Always online, internet of shit and perma update crap came at that same time, first for the OS and later for everything. Oh, plus two decades of using shady Russian software for virus scanning. Shit went up, update everything became everywhere and everyday. Plus gigabyte frameworks for functionality that was kilobytes before.

My point in cursing too much? (Sorry, mentally screaming FUD here.) That tiny code projects, even without an active maintainer, in the LLM-era are probably a lot more secure when run by the people they target (we run containers, and sandboxes, the cool kids run immutable distros). This is democratizing software, and it has the great feel of old.

Please everyone, vibe code tiny project with tiny codebases everyday. Dump them on GitHub in a free tier. Make so many that the people have a free choice again! And go watch Cliff Stoll again for that hacker energy!

How do you expect a hierarchy to function? Should the assistant to the SVP ask the managers to let the employees reschedule? That’s like a lot of bureaucracy for exactly the same flexibility.

(Am open to better approaches though! Not saying I particularly enjoy last minute urgent meetings you can’t say no to. But most often those are important and with people whose agendas need more care than mine.)

Thank you! Geigerclickbate?

This just reads so anthropocentric to me. Humans are wired to see intelligence only where intelligence is human-like. We see autonomous action-response and planning as the keys to intelligence. I would expect that, dear primate based Homo sapiens.

We are experiencing non-humanoid intelligence without AGI. That is awesome. And we don’t have a clue how to protect ourself from AGI.

Likewise, we intelligent primates have this great system of coordination called market economics that lets us destroy our home planet with our eyes open. That’s what we call intelligence!

(Not 100% personal opinion and deliberately inflated from the I’ve been thinking about.)

Wasn’t meaning to insult, sorry. Didn’t take the lowest interpretation though (“performative”, “clown suit”). And I didn’t go for the ad hominem about men in sweat suites.

I guess we need the distinction of made vs. made to fit (a suit that is tailored post-production) and made to measure (a tailor-made suite; each piece of cloth size for a unique product). Best fitting is made to measure and that is what I am referring to.

You have probably never worn a tailored suit. The difference between a good fit and a mediocre fit is in centimeters on the right spots, not the difference between a clown suit and a fitting suit. Tailoring is mainly for fit, not looks. Just the tailoring sessions shows that: about 40 minutes of measurements, and about 10 minutes of choices in wool, in pockets, in model. And to expand on the theme in OP: Super 140 wool is an awesome material on both durability and flexibility. There is a few thousand years of tech just in the wool. (Beat that cotton jeans!)

A tailored suit, but indeed, every tailored piece of clothing will always have the best fit and comfort. That's trivial. Even your sweat suit would benefit from being a tailored sweat suit.

I have non standard measurements and buying trousers has always been a chore (a cm lower shoulder, a 1/2 cm shorter leg, cyclist quads, life influences body). I've now started to use AI to pre-select brands and fits that might suit my sizing. Which is actually just moving somewhat towards at least 'fitted' clothing. The future of adult and sustainable fashion 'should' be made to measure.