timjver

6 ms·

1.
by timjver 28d ago
The whole point of Lean is that you don't need to understand the entire proof to be sure that it's correct. You only need to understand the definition of the theorem being proven, and you need to trust that the relatively small co
2.
by timjver 2mo ago
That doesn't really answer the question of how they're going to detect it at scale. Ban repositories with long comments?
3.
by timjver 2mo ago
> A 3rd party hosting platform like fireworks.ai that hosts open weights models won't provide any of that at all. Why couldn't they?
4.
by timjver 3mo ago
So then bots will just intentionally fail the test?
5.
by timjver 3mo ago
> Over treatment can be a real problem. Indeed, but having more data might be able to solve that? The whole problem seems to be that benign conditions sometimes look scary because we're currently not able to predict well enough whet
6.
by timjver 3mo ago
It's equally signaling that other US-based labs can't provide reliable access to their closed-weight models.
7.
by timjver 5mo ago
Verifying that every step in a (potentially long) proof is sound can of course be much, much harder than verifying that a definition is correct. That's kind of the whole point.
8.
by timjver 2y ago
By "online wallet" they were likely referring to the Bybit website being the wallet of those customers that held their coins there rather than keeping them in their own private wallets, and not whether the hack involved a hot wall
9.
by timjver 2y ago
> It would be similar to if I claimed that an LLM is an expert doctor, but in my data I've filtered out all of the times it gave incorrect medical advice. Computationally it's trivial to detect illegal moves, so it's nothi
10.
by timjver 2y ago
> in the absence of other celestial bodies the satellite would be in a stable orbit Presumably entering such an orbit is only possible due to forces from other celestial bodies in the first place, since otherwise if you reversed time it
11.
Pulley system composition – a systematic approach (2020)(kiipeilytuomas.fi)
66 points by timjver 2y ago|17 comments
12.
by timjver 3y ago
They said nothing about not printing any non-primes.
13.
by timjver 3y ago
VanMoof bikes are known for breaking quickly. Calling them "so much better" than Cowboy based on a single bad experience doesn't seem totally reasonable.
14.
by timjver 3y ago
Simply twisting a single corner piece or flipping a single edge piece achieves that already, without having to mess with the stickers.
15.
by timjver 4y ago
Whether or not it is a coincidence depends on whether Obsidian planned this. Apple isn't going to base their release schedule on something like this.
16.
by timjver 4y ago
Give Copilot a try, it has been way more reliable for me in terms of giving good code suggestions than ChatGPT so far.
17.
by timjver 4y ago
That's probably an impossible task. The best they can do is ask contestants nicely not to do this, but that opens the can of worms of whether tools like GitHub Copilot should not be allowed, either.
18.
by timjver 4y ago
Just in case performance matters, there is a more efficient way: have the tortoise stay in place and advance the hare only one node at a time, and assign the hare to the tortoise every time a power of 2 number of steps have been made. This
19.
by timjver 6y ago
Right, but will they be eligible the year after? If not, then this still means that not surpassing the threshold could increase their revenue in the long run.
20.
by timjver 7y ago
Not to mention that that was a comment on GitHub, not on Reddit, even though the "far, far, far over the line" statement was about "the now-usual Reddit uproar". I guess Klabnik just really dislikes Reddit.
21.
by timjver 7y ago
Yeah, that comment on the GitHub issue was definitely over the line, but it wasn't on Reddit. The comments in the subreddit were higher in volume, but way more reasonable.
22.
by timjver 7y ago
This could very well be thanks to the moderators, but I hardly saw any nasty comments on r/rust. People were critical of the actix maintainer, sure, but I didn't see anything that crossed the line. Some comments in the GitHub issu
23.
by timjver 8y ago
You're not wrong, but the author's code does in no way rely on the fact that you could theoretically iterate over all the valid Int values in Swift, so it would have made no difference if the Int type was somehow truly infinite. A
24.
by timjver 8y ago
I'm not a huge fan of Optional.matching (also commonly called Optional.filter) because you may want to "filter" non-optionals as well, i.e. T -> Optional<T> given a predicate. Unfortunately Swift doesn't (yet?)
25.
by timjver 8y ago
I think the lack of left-right symmetry was the surprising bit.
26.
by timjver 8y ago
>but still we may introduce the problem to places that did not have it before. And perhaps in some places this will cause the problem to disappear. I think it will be fine.
27.
by timjver 8y ago
I doubt the difference will only be 0.2%.
28.
by timjver 8y ago
Or a problem of mixing class inheritance with protocol conformance, perhaps.
29.
by timjver 8y ago
Isn't operator overloading something else than the ability to define custom operators?
30.
by timjver 9y ago
What makes it immoral for Buterin to have a large amount of Ether? Would it be immoral for a very early investor to buy a lot of Ether for a very low price?

More ›