![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
Somehow, we manage to accept organ transplants despite it hurting one healthy person a little to help an unhealthy person a lot. What’s stopping us from treating birth control the same way?
Somehow, we manage to accept organ transplants despite it hurting one healthy person a little to help an unhealthy person a lot. What’s stopping us from treating birth control the same way?
“Insufficient detail. Please ask a specific question.”
This is a very real problem from the answering side. So many people would rather have you guess what they’re trying to ask and then get mad at you when you guess wrong.
You might benefit from installing earlyoom. It’ll kill some of your processes before the system freezes from running out of memory.
It is made by scientists. And we don’t know how to make the model determine whether or not it knows something. So far, we only have tools that tell us that something probably wasn’t in the training set (e.g. using variance across models in a mixture of experts setup), but that doesn’t tell us anything about how correct it is.
I’ve heard Elon Musk (or was it Karpathy?) talking about how camera should be sufficient for all scenarios because humans can do it on vision alone, but that’s poor reasoning IMO. Cars are not humans, so there’s no reason to confine them to the same limitations. If we want them to be safer and more capable than human drivers, one way to do that is by providing them with more information.
Standing on the shoulder of dwarves hiding deep underground
Oh, I see. You’re clarifying why jonne thought this was the case, not arguing for why they’re correct.
The article is about Google. Why does it matter that it’s missing from the Alphabet handbook?
Tbh, I’d rather work and line the shareholders pockets a little bit more than be bored out of my mind in a pointless meeting.
Have you found any of the former?
I don’t see how it would be possible to completely replace programmers. The reason we have programming languages instead of using natural language is that the latter has ambiguities. If you start having to describe your software’s behaviour in natural language, then one of three things can happen:
The interesting part is how to do this in a sustainable way, and from a cursory glance, the article seems to get into that.
If connecting to a computer in Canada is sufficient excuse seize someone’s computers, then banning VPNs won’t make a difference. There’s no way for them to know that it’s a VPN. It’ll just look like any other internet traffic.
Anyone smart enough to get around that would also be smart enough to get around whatever the government does to block it.
I keep seeing this brought up but I can’t find information on how they work. How do you actually get new wire through a conduit? Do they not get stuck in corners? Or on the ridges of the tubes? What if you need to send wires upwards?
I’ve probably spent more time looking up how to access specific functions in a GUI than for CLI.
It wouldn’t make sense to add clutter to a GUI that benefits a tiny fraction of users a tiny fraction of the time while making the experience worse for everyone else.
It’s very possibly a serious comment. I know some people remap ESC to something on/near the home row because of how much use it gets in vim.
we are […] arresting around 800 suspects every single month.
Okay, but how many actual criminals are getting convicted with the help of your work? Their focus on the number of suspects rather than convictions makes me think that they were never doing anything useful with the information Facebook provided them.
I’d be surprised if being born with a specific face configuration isn’t protected in the same way that race and gender are.