I used to be philosophically anti-piracy in principle, and would often argue online against people who posted disingenuous or self-serving justifications for their actions. But these days the amount of piss-taking by the publishers has destroyed my resolve.
Yarrr.
me too, it’s a slightly awkwardly constructed sentence.
accusing it of refusing to exercise an option
Was this written by an AI or by an illiterate? That’s not what the rest of the article says happened. The Chinese fund didn’t refuse to exercise the option, they refused to honour an option that they’d already signed. The opening sentence makes it look like Kibbutz Hanita are pulling a fast one, when it’s the exact opposite.
Can’t tell if you’re joking or just a dickhead tankie.
Not just the right. The entire Taiwan situation is entirely due to the Chinese being taught at school that Taiwan just is part of China like it’s an immutable fact.
Weird how many people seem to think it’s like a competition or something. It’s a descriptive label.
The whole Pluto thing taught us a lot about the psychology of letting go of something taught at a young age. People getting proper frothing at how they shoulda just let Pluto keep it, just to save themselves the extremely minor cognitive dissonance.
“be wheat” yeah like anyone here has ever been wheat
buncha posers
profoundly stupid
Hey, that was my favourite movie when it came out. I was sure Yahoo Serious was going to be a huge star.
The swallow may fly south with the sun, or the house-martin or the plumber may seek warmer climes in winter; yet these are not strangers to our land.
You don’t even need to, you just need seven digits of numbers. As password formats go, it’s hella low entropy.
First, there’s no “somehow magically” about it, the entire logic of the halting problem’s proof relies on being able to set up a contradiction. I’ll agree that returning undecidable doesn’t solve the problem as stated because the problem as stated only allows two responses.
My wider point is that the Halting problem as stated is a purely academic one that’s unlikely to ever cause a problem in any real world scenario. Indeed, the ability to say “I don’t know” to unsolvable questions is a hot topic of ongoing LLM research.
It’s easy to be dismissive because you’re talking from the frame of reference of current LLMs. The article is positing a universal truth about all possible technological advances in future LLMs.
The thing that always bothered me about the Halting Problem is that the proof of it is so thoroughly convoluted and easy to fix (simply add the ability to return “undecidable”) that it seems wanky to try applying it as part of a proof for any kind of real world problem.
(Edit: jfc, fuck me for trying to introduce any kind of technical discussion in a pile-on thread. I wasn’t even trying to cheerlead for LLMs, I just wanted to talk about comp sci)
The duality of man -
Wholesome: dad gets involved with his kid’s hobby and helps him win
Not wholesome: kid shows up to play with a rigged beyblade someone else made for him, in order to participate in a one-sided competition, predictably breaking the other kid’s toy
I dunno, I feel like neither empty space nor vast aeons of darkness are particularly pulling their weight in terms of really doing existing with any real level of conviction. It’s easy to be vast if you’re doing fuck all with most of it.
Who measures uranium in pounds? I feel like if you’re not using metric you probably shouldn’t be handling uranium.
I think they’re just doing a bit. Nobody is actually that dumb.
https://youtu.be/Br0DCEEBplY?t=33