phlakaton

6 ms·

1.
by phlakaton 4d ago
Well, I'll drink to that!
2.
by phlakaton 10d ago
You say that like it's a bad thing. Consumers are worth less than creators in the cosmic scheme of things. I believe we should be much friendlier to consumers than our laws currently allow, but there should be a balance, and that balan
3.
by phlakaton 11d ago
And the reason that piracy doesn't exist in that case is because the creators have all had to go out of business. ;-)
4.
by phlakaton 13d ago
If it allows you to distinguish readily between human intelligence and computer intelligence, it seems quite relevant to the question of whether computers have achieved something akin to human intelligence. It may not be useful for anything
5.
by phlakaton 18d ago
The East Bay does have some spillover! But there are various reasons it's not as attractive. My hunch is that one of the major reasons is that commutes from the Peninsula and Silicon Valley itself are rough.
6.
by phlakaton 18d ago
Maybe wages if the company puts the IPO proceeds towards additional hiring. The other bits sound pretty speculative to me. I could see outside investors walking away with most of the early gains, leaving employees and locals underwater.
7.
by phlakaton 18d ago
Let's just say I'll believe that when I see it. Looks to me like they'll be operating at losses well beyond their IPOs.
8.
by phlakaton 18d ago
Silicon Valley exists as a persistent thumb on the nose against load-balancing ideas. It's had an absolute glut of tech companies for many decades now, with no apologies needed. Many people in the region benefit from that concentration
9.
by phlakaton 18d ago
Those were arguably due to neglect rather than public housing being problematic per se. Perhaps the same thing would happen if the Feds tried it again; perhaps the neglect is a practically unavoidable consequence given our politics. But I t
10.
by phlakaton 19d ago
It is not OpenAI's or Anthropic's responsibility to build housing in SF. It is the city's. Putting the heat on the mayor and supervisors is the correct move. I've been "entertaining" myself recently with a repo
11.
by phlakaton 21d ago
There is no serious discussion on this point. There was never intended to be. There is only the bullying, and now the tone policing. But we all have better things to do with our time.
12.
by phlakaton 21d ago
And I can provide more than adequate evidence supporting that assertion.
13.
by phlakaton 22d ago
There's no debate. There never was. There is only concession to the diktat or resistance.
14.
by phlakaton 22d ago
I think you mean the Gulf of Mexico. It's poor form to let a crybaby bully have his way.
15.
by phlakaton 25d ago
When I see "friendly introduction," I don't expect to see a deadhead sticker front and center. But I guess if you're an actual Deadhead it's not that startling. ;-)
16.
by phlakaton 26d ago
All this plus a malware popup too, at least when I looked.
17.
by phlakaton 1mo ago
1. Sure we have values for earlier periods, estimated through abundant and reliable (in its own way) geologic evidence. But you don't even need to bo back further than 100 years to see how wildly our climate is whiplashing right now. 2
18.
by phlakaton 1mo ago
Nope! C.f. classical mechanics at scale vs. statistical mechanics.
19.
by phlakaton 1mo ago
1. The global temperature has never in human history done what it's doing now. 2. Weather isn't the same as climate. They operate on way different scales and timelines. Uncertainty in the one does not necessarily map to uncertaint
20.
by phlakaton 2mo ago
For those who read this title as being about Dr. Bill Bruford, the legendary English jazz-rock drummer, this here can be our little bemused happy place.
21.
by phlakaton 2mo ago
45 years earlier in some cases. I found the Robie House in Chicago (built in 1910!) to be a total head-trip.
22.
by phlakaton 2mo ago
None of the billionaires got that way by throwing money at egg studies. Bold to think they'd just start doing it now. Insurance companies don't fund medical research AFAIK? But if they did, it would be coming out of your premiums.
23.
by phlakaton 3mo ago
Space is not a hedge against these things. At best it's our final tomb. There is no backup plan.
24.
by phlakaton 3mo ago
Then your issue is not the S&P methodology, which despite changes in detail remains, as you've said, aimed at filtering out undesirable companies from the index. Your issue is that you want us to believe your favorite tech stocks,
25.
by phlakaton 3mo ago
Because it's selective, the S&P by definition does not reflect the actual market. It reflects a subset of it. If you're comfortable with this notion of what the S&P does, then you ought to be comfortable with S&P apply
26.
by phlakaton 3mo ago
> Because the index needs accuracy. No, it doesn't. At least, not the way you are probably defining it. This sounds to me like you may be trying to use the index for something it's not really meant to be used for.
27.
by phlakaton 4mo ago
A business that can bring in a steady $2.5B a year doesn't seem like a bad business to me, so long as they can turn that into a profit. I think there ought to be a recognized place in the ecosystem for this sort of thing, and for me th
28.
by phlakaton 4mo ago
I thought the AI art was okay, actually! For AI art. For me it's contextual. In the case of engineering presentations in particular, I'll live with some AI art if it means less reading off of fifteen-bullet-point wall-to-wall text
29.
by phlakaton 5mo ago
Haven't read the book, but points two and three definitely struck some bells in the back clocktowers of my mind. More generally, reading a bit of Orwell was inescapable in my schooling, but I sought out 1984 myself. I discovered I had
30.
by phlakaton 5mo ago
Mostly when presented disagreeably. You might reflect upon that.

More ›