calibas

8 ms·

1.
by calibas 2mo ago
This will be very useful if they can find a way to make it without something that costs $12,000 per kg.
2.
by calibas 2mo ago
> one of the V3A animations reminds me loosely of things I saw when I was a kid, at night, shortly before I slept Hypnagogic hallucinations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnagogia
3.
by calibas 3mo ago
The largest tree on record is rejected in part because it's over the theoretical limit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nooksack_Giant Too bad we cut it down, along with almost every other giant Douglas-fir.
4.
by calibas 4mo ago
There's evidence creatine may raise DHT levels, and DHT causes hair thinning: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19741313/
5.
by calibas 5mo ago
Our long term plan is for Jesus to come back and fix everything. I wish I was joking...
6.
by calibas 5mo ago
If the photography was mediocre, nobody would accuse it of being AI, but because it's the flawless photography of a true professional, suddenly it's highly suspect.
7.
by calibas 5mo ago
I notice the article, the paper, and the "plain language" summary of the paper don't mention the common term for this phenomenon, St Elmo's fire.
8.
by calibas 5mo ago
I was playing around with this recently, but the problem I encountered is that most AI analysis techniques like stem separation aren't built to work in real-time.
9.
by calibas 6mo ago
Yeah, that seems like an odd thing to say. It's like they're setting themselves up for a "no true Scotsman" argument. Anybody who disagrees with their decisions isn't a "true believer" in open source.
10.
by calibas 6mo ago
I get what you're saying, but I disagree that LLMs should be inserting ads into git commits. By default, the LLM is credited with authorship anyway, and I assume the user can easily just remove the ad, though I don't use Copilot.
11.
by calibas 6mo ago
You're conflating two different things. When an LLM writes a commit, it should take credit. I see nothing wrong with it adding: > Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 noreply@anthropic.com Compare that to the message the article is talki
12.
by calibas 6mo ago
It was largely replaced with it's molecular analog, BPS. Just like BPA, BPS is an endocrine disruptor. The idea that it's less harmful than BPA is mostly due to lack of research.
13.
by calibas 6mo ago
Everyone's being diplomatic, including most of the HN comments. This seems to be the simplest compromise, and allows OpenTTD to continue existing without too many problems from Atari, so people don't want to make waves.
14.
by calibas 6mo ago
I'm confused, you think I'm saying he's breaking guidelines? I should have been more clear, but I was trying to skirt the guidelines. I'm sure that astroturfing happens on HN, and I think that not allowing people to talk
15.
by calibas 6mo ago
> I've seen no one working on this, and in fact most people on HN seem to be working on ways to further exacerbate this problem. It's against the HN guidelines to insinuate that astroturfing happens on HN.
16.
by calibas 7mo ago
If I boycott a company, am I legally responsible for any lost profit that happens as a result?
17.
by calibas 7mo ago
Calling it a "mystery" gets suckers like me to click the link.
18.
by calibas 7mo ago
If it's not clear already, I'm not a lawyer and I'm not using strict legal definitions.
19.
by calibas 7mo ago
Yep, that's the exact "loophole" I mentioned in my original comment! The government can now partner with private businesses to effectively bypass the Fourth Amendment.
20.
by calibas 7mo ago
You seem to be playing dumb here. You realize us "normal people" believe the Bill of Rights is to protect us from the government, and the 4th means the government doesn't get to spy on everybody indiscriminately? And yes, the
21.
by calibas 7mo ago
You're an attorney and you're asking me why the government spying on everyone is a clear violation of the 4th Amendment?
22.
by calibas 7mo ago
It's a clear violation of the 4th Amendment, but the government acts like they've found a "loophole" because it's private businesses doing the spying.
23.
by calibas 7mo ago
This doesn't seem very fair, you speak as if you're being objective, then lean heavy into the FUD. Even if you were correct, and "truth" is essentially dead, that still doesn't call for extreme cynicism and unfounde
24.
by calibas 7mo ago
Personally, I take a break from AI and write the code myself at least a few times each day. It keeps one intellectually honest about whether or not you really understand what's going on.
25.
by calibas 7mo ago
Where do you think Wikipedia gets its information? The World Facebook is one of the most cited sources on Wikipedia.
26.
by calibas 8mo ago
It's vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks, and the man-in-the-middle happens to be Meta. The tricky part would be doing it and not getting caught though.
27.
by calibas 8mo ago
So use Rust instead, Godot supports bindings via FFI: https://godot-rust.github.io/ I wont claim it works flawlessly, but you don't have to use GDScript or C# to program Godot. You can also use C++, Go, Java, Typescrip
28.
by calibas 8mo ago
Fair enough, so then how fast would a semi-attentive driver stop? The comment I originally replied to makes the claim a human's brain wouldn't have even responded fast enough to register the child was there. That's going WAY
29.
by calibas 8mo ago
> A human driver travelling at the same speed would have hit that child at exactly 17 mph, before their brain even registered that child was there. Not sure where this is coming from, and it's directly contradicted by the article: &
30.
by calibas 8mo ago
Sounds like it's about the precession of the equinoxes and the new "Age of Aquarius".

More ›