it was not (solely) about slaves; this was debated in Congress during the process of drafting the amendment and resoundingly put down by contemporary legislators.
from Justice Jackson’s concurring opinion:
> Senator Edgar Cowan, for example, argued that German immigrants’ children born in Pennsylvania should be citizens, but Chinese immigrants’ children should not—because Germans and Chinese were different. In response, Senator Trumbull emphasized
that the law he had drafted drew no such distinctions.
Undeterred, Senator Cowan would warn again—this time during debates on the Fourteenth Amendment—that the Citizenship Clause would let Chinese immigrants “overrun” California and “double or treble the population” of that State. Senator John Conness of California, where anti-Chinese sentiment was arguably most pronounced, responded that “the children begotten of Chinese parents in California . . . shall be citizens.” In fact, he said, the Civil Rights Act had already declared “that the children of all parentage whatever . . . should be regarded and treated as citizens of the United States.” No Senator rose to agree with Senator Cowan or dispute what Senator Conness had said. And no Senator said what the principal dissent says today: that the text at issue conferred citizenship only on freed Blacks and those in analogous situations.
- - -
further down, Justice Jackson cites the most forthright example of how blisteringly ahistorical the Republican party’s arguments are on this topic:
> During the ratification debates, Senator Cowan took aim at the Roma people too, characterizing them as undeserving of birthright citizenship because they “wander[ed] in gangs,” “infest[ed] society,” and “impos[ed] upon the simple and weak everywhere.” And again, Senator Conness dismissed Senator Cowan’s prejudices: “The only invasion of Pennsylvania within my recollection was an invasion very much worse and more disastrous to the State, and more to be feared and more feared, than that of Gypsies. It was an invasion of rebels [at Gettysburg].”
not speaking in any official capacity, but: we great internal training material courtesy of some very thoughtful folks, and ultimately one hopes that most of the code is going to be pretty straightforward wherever possible.
> And the rest of automakers offerings aren’t half as good.
This was true maybe even as recently as 5 years ago, but it certainly isn’t true now.
Tesla, at the top end, hasn’t been an attractive luxury proposition at least since the Hyundai Genesis & Mercedes EVs started rolling out. They had a shot at capturing the mid- to low-end market, but it looks like they’re in the process of blowing that as well.
> Hard to do in times of austerity [..]
The average American’s lifestyle is hardly austere — it _is_ precarious for very many (most?), but I don’t think that’s the same thing.
You can now get refurb EVs (e.g. a Hyundai Ionia) with <50k miles for <$15k, and that’s in a not-inexpensive part of the US (northeast).
Over the course of the next 10 years that used market is going to only grow, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that a battery swap will be less costly than the sorts of overhauls high-mileage gasoline cars require so there _will_ be a solid used market.
do not listen to someone like DHH, who loves to speak at length on topics that he is deeply unfamiliar with.
> Mortality in children, adolescents, and adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a nationwide cohort study
>
> ADHD was associated with significantly increased mortality rates. People diagnosed with ADHD in adulthood had a higher MRR than did those diagnosed in childhood and adolescence. Comorbid oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and substance use disorder increased the MRR even further. However, when adjusted for these comorbidities, ADHD remained associated with excess mortality, with higher MRRs in girls and women with ADHD than in boys and men with ADHD. The excess mortality in ADHD was mainly driven by deaths from unnatural causes, especially accidents.
reposting my comment from another time this discussion came up:
"Cosmopolitan has basically always felt like the interesting sort of technical loophole that makes for a fun blog post which is almost guaranteed to make it to the front page of HN (or similar) purely based in ingenuity & dedication to the bit.
as a piece of foundational technology, in the way that `libc` necessarily is, it seems primarily useful for fun toys and small personal projects.
with that context, it always feels a little strange to see it presented as a serious alternative to something like `glibc`, `musl`, or `msvcrt`; it’s a very cute hack, but if i were to find it in something i seriously depend on i think i’d be a little taken aback."
i can't comment about sora specifically, however the architecture can support workloads beyond just LLM inference.
our demo booth at trade shows usually has StyleCLIP up at one point or another to provide an abstract example of this.
disclosure: i work on infrastructure at Groq and am generally interested in hardware architecture and compiler design, however i am not a part of either of those teams :)
i live in NYC and have traveled to plenty of other international cities.
none of the things that you're saying are true compared to my experiences (or those of my friends) in any way that i can think of as meaningful.
the only city i've been to that feels like it's captured the same "vibe" as NYC, for me, has been Paris.
Tokyo was more impressive in its sprawl and history (and obviously cleanliness), but there is a sense of Japanese monoculture that saturates everything in a way that is almost tactile. not in a bad way, but definitely such that i felt like something was "missing" during my visit.
Singapore gets really close to the same feeling, but for all of its heterogeneity there's an undercurrent of authoritarian sterility that made it very difficult to feel comfortable (Disneyland with the Death Penalty, indeed).
anyway this is already pretty long winded so i should probably stop talking, but NYC has a lot "going for it" besides the rest of the US just sort of being a suburban hellscape. at some point i'll move out, but living here has been a really comforting reminder that international views such as yours of American cities are incorrect.
unless i'm misunderstanding `whisper.cpp` seems to support streaming & the repository includes a native example[0] and a WASM example[1] with a demo site[2].
fwiw in my experience it's entirely possible to avoid this if you don't submit an application "cold" (i.e. through the careers page), but through a recruiter or referral _IF_ you have a strong portfolio of open source work and/or exposure in technical spaces.
i'm more than happy to do take-home assignments or complete reasonable timed assessments, but i have (politely) refused to complete leetcode-style gotcha screens when they have been presented to me as "just another part of the application process".
idk, though. maybe that's a privileged statement based on my position, but from what i can tell grinding leetcode seems to be much less reliable these days & the toll it takes on a lot of folks is pretty significant.
sure but some people also find life more enjoyable with the addition of recreational substances.
for such folks, especially ones who don't have much exposure to recreational drug use outside of drinking culture, i think GP's question is perfectly reasonable.
there are plenty of people whose drug of choice used to be alcohol and have since switched to something else and found equivalent or greater satisfaction; seems like this thread might be a good forum to have that discussion.
not sure how approachable it might be, but i like to think the documentation isn't too bad for my personal stuff.
definitely nothing so well thought out as a tutorial, but i try to describe the structure & implementation of my approach + cross-link to relevant tools that i incorporate.
didn’t realize this had happened until i logged off of my work computer & saw someone had shared this thread in a group chat.
looks like we were completely unaffected, as no one made any updates to derivations referencing GitHub sources in a way that invalidated old entries (i.e. no version bumps, new additions, etc.).
> [...] part of the tradeoff in working for someone else [...] is accepting that you work by their rules.
i think a healthy working relationship involves employer & employee collaborating according to a set of mutually beneficial rules, which prevents either party from taking advantage of the other.
this is (at least idealistically) what employment contracts are for, even if they have a natural tendency to favor the employer in most situations.
besides that, i think there are plenty of examples from recent history which demonstrate that it's not healthy for the rules under which an employee operates to be solely outlined by the owner of the business (e.g. because that owner may attempt to take advantage of the employee).
this is a bizarre straw man to stand up in response to GP, especially given the context of the post we're discussing.
in my experience, the framing and rhetorical style that you're using is often used to make excuses or apologies for business practices that diminish the power employees have in the workplace.
we'e not talking about some nebulous "they" that "always wants more", we're talking about the specific case of Blizzard utilizing stack ranking and then firing a manager who is unwilling to be opaque about the capricious evaluation they are being asked to do to their direct reports.
from Justice Jackson’s concurring opinion:
> Senator Edgar Cowan, for example, argued that German immigrants’ children born in Pennsylvania should be citizens, but Chinese immigrants’ children should not—because Germans and Chinese were different. In response, Senator Trumbull emphasized that the law he had drafted drew no such distinctions. Undeterred, Senator Cowan would warn again—this time during debates on the Fourteenth Amendment—that the Citizenship Clause would let Chinese immigrants “overrun” California and “double or treble the population” of that State. Senator John Conness of California, where anti-Chinese sentiment was arguably most pronounced, responded that “the children begotten of Chinese parents in California . . . shall be citizens.” In fact, he said, the Civil Rights Act had already declared “that the children of all parentage whatever . . . should be regarded and treated as citizens of the United States.” No Senator rose to agree with Senator Cowan or dispute what Senator Conness had said. And no Senator said what the principal dissent says today: that the text at issue conferred citizenship only on freed Blacks and those in analogous situations.
- - -
further down, Justice Jackson cites the most forthright example of how blisteringly ahistorical the Republican party’s arguments are on this topic:
> During the ratification debates, Senator Cowan took aim at the Roma people too, characterizing them as undeserving of birthright citizenship because they “wander[ed] in gangs,” “infest[ed] society,” and “impos[ed] upon the simple and weak everywhere.” And again, Senator Conness dismissed Senator Cowan’s prejudices: “The only invasion of Pennsylvania within my recollection was an invasion very much worse and more disastrous to the State, and more to be feared and more feared, than that of Gypsies. It was an invasion of rebels [at Gettysburg].”