No. RSI doesn't mean a model modifies its own running code/weights. It trains another copy of them as a baseline for the next round of the experiment.

They are. It's just not happening on the versions we have access to. Look at Sakana. RSI just involves defining an experiment and parameters, and varying the values of the parameters, trying out a training run, and record the results. If it works well, use the results as part of the base model for the next iteration. All of that can be automated. I have no idea why people are saying they can't be. If people iterate on them and change one variable at a time, and use that as a means to improvement, an AI can be tasked to do the same. And they can also be trained to design the experiments themselves.

Small teams running the show is the new normal. AI coding assistants mean that software engineers must also be product engineers, well enough to explain how to build features from soup to nuts, to LLMs. I know. this is what I do for a living now.

You can turn off auto-updates, but you'll be sorry in other ways.

When you copy files to your computer, that's after you have clicked 'Install' or whatever (or passed the -y flag on the CLI). That's your consent to install the app, and copy the files that come with it to your computer. There is no additional consent required. What the fuck are they even on about with this clickbait nonsense?

When the top ten billionaires have to sell their shares of apple to pay the tax man, it's also your mutual funds and retirement accounts that take the hit on the value as well. When it comes time to pay the tax man, billionaires will have to sell assets to pay the bill. That selling will massively dislocate the markets. Even if only the top 1% of holders have to sell in order to make it happen. Just watch and see. This will be educational.

It'll spread downward pressure on assets that person held and destroy a lot more wealth than they will pay in taxes. This is what will ultimately wake everyone up to the danger of wealth taxes: liquidity issues.

To me the hoops that smoothbrains will jump through to avoid IPv6 and stay on legacy IPv4, especially when hosting, is pathetic. NAT, port forwarding, tunnels, blah blah blah blah.

I have something like ~1.2 trillion times the number of routable addresses that the entire IPv4 space has. Not all are reachable, of course, just the services that need incoming access and they're each on their own isolated DMZ.

Forgot to add: if you enable IPv6, be sure to use the browser extension IPvFoo. It shows a small 4 or 6 in your URI bar to let you know what protocol you're connecting to. Once enabled, you'll see just how much stuff out there actually is IPv6.

Started the move about 18 months ago when I decided to get off my lazy ass. My ISP gives out a /56 prefix, so that lets me run 256 /64 subnets/VLANs in the house, currently there are ~10 in use. Everything get a GUA through SLAAC and I use RAs (Router Advertisements) to give ULAs to everything. Any external facing services get their own VLAN and /64 for the system(s) as needed. Firewall blocks all incoming as they usually do by default and I punch a hole for the external-facing systems. They can't reach back into the network, they only answer the phone. All the systems update DNS dynamically if the prefix or full address ever change.

I have an SSH bastion set up. In all this time there has not been a single SSH attempt from the internet. On IPv4 it was constant background noice.
For those legacy IPv4-only systems on the internet, I set up NAT64. I have an IoT VLAN and IoT 2.4 GHz wireless network that are only IPv4 because a lot of IoT network stacks are junk.

I'm still farting around with it, but man oh man, there's no way I'd go back to IPv4. It was one of the best moves I've done in ages.

This move is driven by Broadcom acting like a private equity manager. They found a place to extract a temporary revenue stream, they're going to milk it, and then sell it off before it becomes too much of a liability.

Broadcom executives surely saw the negative pushback immediately after they started their rug-pulling licensing effort. If they intended to keep this market and their position in it, they would have adjusted their behavior immediately. Instead they're going to rake everyone as they walk out the door. And until they can walk out the door. They knew that they would lose all of these customers in the medium term, but my guess is they figure that the industry is shifting away from paying so much for VMs so they will squeeze the last bit they can out of this dying market. I think they are fully prepared to spin this off if it decides to be a drain on their balance sheet. So far, there's just a lot of angry, paying, enterprise customers giving them free money for something they didn't even have to build. It's a gravy train, quite literally.

I came here to look for this and add it if I didn't find it.

Lunar "soil" is essentially neutral, just needs some additives. Conversely, Martian "soil" is actually poisonous. Additives alone aren't sufficient to get things to grow in it, you need to remove the poisonous parts first.

Net: It's easier to grow plants in lunar rather than Martian "soil".

Yes. That is more plausible.

Bloomberg is also a data service with higher level access to the markets. The box and the software on it aren't what they are selling. They're selling access to the info in .. and this is the important part that perplexity will never match... in near real time.