CyberRabbi

7 ms·

1.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
You cited two sources that are irrelevant to your claim. Neither Sony's nor Microsoft's hardware profits have any necessary bearing on Nintendo's.
2.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
That has nothing to do with fair use. That is a misuse of the term which has a specific meaning in the context of justifying derivative works of copywritten material. You are allowed to make an emulator because there is nothing that says it
3.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
Thank you for confirming that fair use is not a right. Second, yes it absolutely concerns derivative works as it is a concept in the domain of copyright. While not every violation of copyright is a derivative work, only derivative works are
4.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
Why would they do that when their business is selling hardware? You make it seem like they are being foolish or unreasonable. They aren't Netflix
5.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
What are "fair use rights" in this context? Fair use specifically concerns creating derivative works. You don't by default have a right to use Nintendo's IP however you like, no matter how virtuous or benign you think yo
6.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
Can I still use their trademark if I train my AI algorithm on it first then use it to generate the trademark?
7.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
The popular LSD and psychadelic advocacy online and elsewhere is an expression of the mainstream ideology. The foundation of our collective ideology tells us these drugs should have some profound life-altering and improving effect. Obviousl
8.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
Good point. While it seems obvious to me that LLMs can never be anything more than fancy Markov chains, in my experience it seems the majority of human "logic" does not operate much differently. Very rare to encounter someone who
9.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
> In practice, non-virtual function calls are reliably compiled to fairly efficient code while virtual calls are much less reliable. Like I said, this echoes the conventional wisdom that most C++ developers seem to retain. The compiler l
10.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
> If you're programming in C++, you probably do care about this level of performance, and in that case, it's nice to program in a style that guarantees it instead of hoping for a sufficiently smart compiler. Neither implementat
11.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
> Given an optimizing compiler, the first function (count(a)) is likely to just immediately return the size of the backing vector. The function is nearly free. The compiler is able to do that with count_inheritance() as well if it's
12.
by CyberRabbi 3y ago
Oh no!
13.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
> I wouldn’t be surprised if we live in such a world in the next decade. We won't live in that world in the next decade or even in the next 100 years. The technology upon which GPT is built is a dead-end in terms of human-level inte
14.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
hi dang, sorry to be annoying but i have no other way to reach you. I've contacted you at hn@ycombinator.com over my account but haven't received a reply. Did you receive my email? if not, please email me at the address in my acco
15.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
> And, by the way, your assumptions are wrong, pg has written posts on why he thinks sama is one of the most impressive people he's ever met - they even changed the YC rules after him to make the percentage stake that YC takes stand
16.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
This post is currently on the front page but immediately after it was first posted and hit the front page, it was downranked to the second page.
17.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
Kudos to your dad, sounds like he was a great engineer.
18.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
Things must be pretty bad if HN is your support system
19.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
UTC can never be set as a constant offset from TAI, it will eventually cease to be useful and that can never happen.
20.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
In the link you provide it says this about Unix time: In Unix time, every day contains exactly 86400 seconds but leap seconds are accounted for. It then provides an example for when the Unix time went from 915148800 to 915148800 af
21.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
Edit: This comment was not accurate
22.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
The offered value was simply not worth what they were charging. I would venture to say that it would be difficult to sustainably charge anything at all for this. For most people, the alleged slowness of Chrome is good enough. Why would the
23.
Retrofitting Temporal Memory Safety on C++(security.googleblog.com)
1 points by CyberRabbi 4y ago|0 comments
24.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
The model you are suggesting works to some extent but it just isn’t as effective or efficient as the Microsoft model. Compare the usability and the prevalence of the Linux desktop (mostly advanced by red hat) to the Windows desktop. In any
25.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
> I'd argue that software, and in particular operating-system software is perhaps one of the most predictable categories. It inherently ages due to gradual drift on hardware support and growing burdens of security risks and unmet co
26.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
In the grand scheme of things if you set a precedent that copyright ownership is highly conditional and subject to the will of people who seek to dismiss your ownership for their own purposes, that will disincentivize investment in producin
27.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
> Microsoft is already one of the richest companies on the planet, how much more penny pinching must we bear? You’re not entitled to Microsoft’s property regardless of the amount of money they have.
28.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
Yes actually.
29.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
> I always figured the compromise solution was a (likely state-mediated) mandatory licensing board. The majority of your argument seems to be based on the premise that you do not have rights over your own work. That the perceived public
30.
by CyberRabbi 4y ago
> This isn't a pirated work. Distributing software without the permission of the author is the definition of software piracy. This is literally software piracy. The laws that prevent what you consider awesome work like this also pr

More ›