mrjin

6 ms·

1.
by mrjin 1y ago
We don't understand how do we understand. Then, how can we be expected to create something that can understand?
2.
by mrjin 1y ago
No too many, and lots actually run without any issues by using compatible mode.
3.
by mrjin 1y ago
Cannot agree more. Used Windows Server 2003 for over a decade, until I moved away from desktop to laptop and started having driver issues.
4.
by mrjin 1y ago
Nope, I did not. I clearly mentioned the account initial balance etc., and most importantly I did not want to set up a whole charter of accounts. You cannot simply say the sum of all accounts should be zero, depending on the convention used
5.
by mrjin 1y ago
Hey, it's time for some basics of accounting. Below are how those going to look like in the books. Assume initially there were $2000 in cash account, nothing in assets. Cash-Account^^^^^^^^^^^^Assets^^^^^^^^^Asset-Fluctuations^^^^Comm
6.
by mrjin 2y ago
Lol. That's probably one of the considerations while designing the tax rules.
7.
by mrjin 2y ago
There is a level of indirection as it should. But that indirection also adds distortions.
8.
by mrjin 2y ago
It should matter, but it actually doesn't matter as much as you thought as there is a level of indirection. Just look back to the promises made before the election, how many were never fulfilled?
9.
by mrjin 2y ago
You don't cut your own fingers. And that pretty much the whole story.
10.
by mrjin 2y ago
Yep. Get your points. They can if they wish. The question is do they want to? If so, why were those loopholes there in the first place?
11.
by mrjin 2y ago
Those loopholes were by design, complicated enough to prevent most people like us to take advantage of it but will allow those who can afford to evade lots. I'm not sure if people is just naive or playing dumb.
12.
by mrjin 2y ago
My point was that Tax Laws were deliberately complicated to allow some people to evade taxes. If you put that into consideration, you will find it's a lot easier to understand the status quo. Again, what you think or what I think do no
13.
by mrjin 2y ago
I remembered I read the article from Australian Financial Review, although I could not find the original link, got a more detailed one instead. See Page #3. https://australiainstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/202
14.
by mrjin 2y ago
Even if you try to tax the riches, they have billions of ways to evade it. The tax laws are so complicated for a reason. Here in Australia, there were cases that some individuals that earned just about A$1M pa., and they paid ~A$980K to com
15.
by mrjin 2y ago
Nothing lasts forever. The rich get most of the economic growth is inevitable. It's the Matthew effect. In general, the more assets you have, the more passive income you have, which in turn frees people up from worries about making bre
16.
by mrjin 2y ago
It was never meant for everyone. I guess the original audiences were those need ultra mobile devices with extra large screens and do not care much about the price.
17.
by mrjin 2y ago
It looks you might have reversed the result and the cause. The ban was there simply because US peers could not compete already, rather than the ban led to less competition. Mobile devices are really just a relatively small chunk of Huawei&#
18.
by mrjin 2y ago
Hmmm, for 3 minutes?
19.
by mrjin 2y ago
70%, REALLY? My personal experience was that at least 50% of the time, Copilot backfires, sometimes the proposed code was beyond ridiculous. Thus I had to disable it.
20.
by mrjin 2y ago
Doesn't really matter.
21.
by mrjin 2y ago
Even code generation is barely usable if you really start to use it. Currently VisualStudio's intellisense is generating completely junk code half of the time.
22.
by mrjin 2y ago
I would not even try. The reason is simple, there is absolutely no ability of understanding in any of current self claimed auto driving approach, no matter how well they market them.
23.
by mrjin 2y ago
Even if it does, can it resurrect the deceased?
24.
by mrjin 2y ago
Search was the only thing I need Google. Great, now the dependency removed itself.
25.
by mrjin 2y ago
Yep, I get that. I was from there. My NAS is almost 10 years old now, and there are just above 60 TiB data on it, there is nothing I cannot really lose on it. I don't really have a reason to put a 20 bays NAS at home, so simple volumes
26.
by mrjin 2y ago
Wasn't that obvious? If any tests were performed at all, how anyone can manage to caused an outage at such scale?
27.
by mrjin 2y ago
LLMs can neither understand nor hallucinate. All LLMs are just picking tokens based on probability. So doesn't matter how plausible the outputs look, the reasons lead to the output are absolutely NOT what we expect them to be. But such
28.
by mrjin 2y ago
What you need is backup. RAID is not backup and is not for most home/personal users. I learnt that the hard way. Now my NAS use simple volumes only, after all, I really don't have many things I cannot lose on it. If it's some
29.
by mrjin 2y ago
Machines don't hallucinate, humans do. Just stop pretending LLMs have any intelligence.
30.
by mrjin 2y ago
Define stranded please?

More ›