1941 to 1990

You mean 1939?

Oh yeah wait a mo America only "came to its allies aid" after being attacked. That my man is not being a reliable ally, that's being purely self interested.

US hasn't been a reliable ally to anyone sans maybe Israel in decades.

When has the US been a reliable ally?

Parents no longer parent and expect the schools to teach their unruly and coddled child.

cool.

Why?

The computers sat in a lab, and the kids would interact with them a couple times a week in a structured (instructed) setting.

Good grief no!

All the value I got was in the non structured settings where you could fart around on the computers without interference from teachers who by and large didn't know much about computers at all. Of course there was no internet at that point so that was mostly programing. I always did best in the least heavily structured subjects.

I do not know why Americans hate nuance so much but it's pretty deeply ingrained in our culture.

Puritanism.

Murder a bunch of toddlers? Murder is a sin and you're going to hell.

Steal a loaf of bread to feed you starving kid? Stealing is a sin and you're going to hell.

The end result's the same and equally bad either way, regardless of the sin. This strips away all nuance. If you're good you go to heaven, if you sin you go to hell.

Are you human? Please complete the following captcha:

What's 0.1 + 0.2.

If the answer is 0.30000000001 then you failed.

Seriously, it's a pretty common metaphor. People don't literally mean the physical objects known as screens are bad per-se. It's what's on the majority of them in the hands of kids the majority of the time. It's much easier to say "screens" as opposed to specifying particular kinds of social media, and particular genres of short form videos and etc. Because we both know that if people didn't be 100% fully precise then you'd be complaining that forums are technically social media and some of those are fine etc etc.

A nerd might say "well akshually it's what's on the screen" whereas most people know what's meant by the phrase.

People don't use pedantically precise language all the time, fully caveated and cited as if they are having a particularly obnoxious internet debate. People use slang, jargon, shorthand, metaphor and simile in order to communicate.

Iâ(TM)m betting during the boom of the gold rush there wasnâ(TM)t any pickaxe vendor lagging behind in sales. Not even the biggest ones.

It isn't. They are doing very, very well with stock nearly doubling in a year. That's mad crazy levels of growth. But they're doing incredibly well from a solid base. Intel spent a decade fucking up so they're a long way down which means they have higher to climb.

I simply can't imagine why it wouldn't be orders of magnitude cheaper and faster to just use short segments that don't need to be aligned so precisely.

So having 100 times the number of segments but now all with poorly aligned joints would be better?

I used to think that maybe I, a simple country ignoramus, just wasn't equipped to understand the Wonders of the Modern Age. ...

This relentless focus on whomever's on the Other Team as the problem this election cycle, is the problem.

The "other team" as you put is is currently running your country with the Presidency, house, senate and Supreme Court. The absolutely should be getting relentless focus.

Would you rather the focus was on people not currently in power and who can't really do all that much?

What the fuck are you talking about.

I made a statement about how LLM s are implemented. They can make use of true random data, something you claimed was impossible.

You were simply wrong that competes cannot do randomness. Admit you were mistaken.

I hope I don't get dumber as I get up to his age.

And I hope I don't get stiff joints!

Since proof that the deity of any major religion exists, or doesn't exist, is, by definition, impossible, that affirmative belief there is not God is exactly as much an act of faith as the belief there is.

You can't prove that magical wielding, sentient unicorns exist or don't exist either (they use their magic and wiles to stay hidden you see). I think it's a stretch to say that belief that they do exist is exactly as much an act of faith as belief that they don't.

Am I deeply religious because I'm basically sure they don't exist? That seems a bit of a stretch to me.

Or you know, Russel's teapot.

Do I believe that an ill-defined thing for which there's no evidence exists? Well, there's a countably infinite number of those and by brain is finite, so I literally, mathematically cannot believe in them all, which makes it not blind faith. So what's special about this so-called "god" to elevate it beyond one member of an infinite list of things with no evidence?

This CANNOT be overstated. LLMs are software, they execute on machines that are entirely deterministic and do not work unless they are.

This is not true. Firstly, most computers contain hardware random number generators which are absolutely not deterministic, along with things like the kernel RNG which pools entropy from external sources yielding non determinism.

This is not a "well akshually", it's an important point.

Second, LLMs make use of a random or pseudorandom source. The output of an iteration is basically all possible tokens with weights (ish) and it uses weighted randomness to pick them.

But also, are you saying the determining factor for consciousness is randomness? Because we can do randomness now quite well.

Ok that's different.

Not sure I agree though, not entirely. The general public has never been as into privacy and security as the average slashdotter. We care a lot, most people just don't care as much. I'm not sure the Overton window has shifted so much as there has been more reason to go in this direction.

Regardless of the solution it's clear to me something is rotten in the state of tech companies. Most people feel the predatory actions and targeting of young people is a real problem. Also I don't think it's reasonable to simply blame parents, that now over worked group work two jobs not one, when the thing that's changed isn't people but the concentration of wealth and power.

The proposed solution is I've that many just never objected to and is at least superficially reasonable and effective. I don't think this is much of a left be right thing for most people, maybe more of a tech Vs not tech. I think many people don't understand the risks and consequences and just assume nerds will make it work somehow.

Cpanel?

https://www.malwarebytes.com/b...