If Fox News or NYT doesn't run a story, is it censorship?
The "press" is free to express their speech, but they are not obligated to uphold your rights. That is on us. Tech is no different.
People have been fooled into thinking that just because the platform is a open to anybody, that Twitter/FB has to act without bias. Bias is allowed. These aren't free speech outlets. There is no such thing. Your rights are not given, by twitter, they are taken, by you.
The double standard is that the platforms can both censor content, while at the same time they are not legally responsible for content posted by users. It should be one or the other. They have their cake and eat it, and that is why they have so much power.
4% of the population is small enough to represent people with extra sensitive hearing, or bigger ears. They could be hearing many different sources of low frequencies (long wavelengths), which have high resonance ergo long range.
The most general (worldwide) sources I can think of would be high altitude wind, or subterranean water flow. I heard the hum, middle of last night, after two days heavy rain, and I live over a large watershed. I have sensitive hearing and big ears. The study should also ask people to rate their motion sensitivity.
The connection is obvious. If you hear it sucks to apply or work there, you may decide against trying. If a dude with HN blogging cred says it's cool, you reconsider.
It's a terrible read, all sugar and good-buddy fluff. One could easily question the motivation for such cheese.
Sit down dude. You think you are standing up for rights, but are making a case for weaker security by trusting, i.e. that MS and Apple won't backdoor you in an instant if they must. You are literally, actually, a shill, especially with this pompous presentation.
None of your list is better than nothing, if the authoritarians want your data. Except, maybe, Tor, and only if people contribute to running exit nodes.
If it isn't end-to-end, and only you know and control your keys, you are already doomed. In other words, you cannot trust any service with your keys. That includes https and signal.
EFF is being disingenuous here, probably at the behest of so many internet service companies, who need your data, and technically own your passwords. They never have, and don't care about your privacy. Don't shill for these companies, not even the ones with good intentions.
Your passwords are still protected by your right to privacy, and the 5th amendment. This bill won't change that. It only forced (at your state's discretion) that internet services give records to law enforcement.
This could weaken internet services, which only pretend to protect your privacy, and then sell it everything else about your "private bits".
It could strengthen privacy by forcing people to get real about their security and take encryption into their own, private hands. Run your own servers, and end-to-end all the things.
But the electric sheep can't see this, and trust too blindly EFF and the same internet companies that they otherwise despise for their use of your data. The time to choose in nigh. Either you let MSFAANG keep the lock and key to your data, full wise that they will give it up for ads and authority, or your realize that the only way to change the web is to adapt and use it differently.
These companies never cared about your privacy. We know this because of their willingness to comply to, for instance, Chinese authority. Ya'll have been red-scared all over again, decrying China as a threat to the world, while your own Government eats away at your own liberties in the name of protecting you.
The amount of hate in this thread is so typical HN, somebody should be concerned (oh but we must keep the forum civil). There isn't a single thread of consideration on the topic, only a dogpile of naysaying by anonymous commentariat of dubious credibility. Presented with a difficult read, the comments clearly show nobody here actually tried.
Can a forum of programmers and techies really not fathom a computational approach to physics? Graphs are only a social database to you?
You worship a framework of physics fraught with limitations, missing pieces, and paradoxes, which few of you understand beyond a simplification, and act like the Pope of Quantum Physics.
Disruption huurrrrrr. What a cesspool. You people are techno-sheep.
Shows just how valuable neo-yuppies are to local economies and politics. Go home, you actually make it worse for everybody else. Plus, your vote matters in any other state.
Travel is so valuable to perspective, too. I know some people on the woke spectrum who would be a lot less miserable if they traveled even to other U.S. states, but the up-front cost is a barrier. Share your miles, make the world a better place!
The U.S. should invest in sending youth abroad (not excluding domestically). The U.S. should also invest in sending entrepreneurs abroad. Thanks for coming to my two-cent talk.
Forget AI democritization, GPT-3 is AI demoguerization.
GPT-3 is singular; it is one model, one dataset, one training. Yet it will be the only one that will exist for quite some time (or by far the most available), and now it will underwrite productization and malfeasance, a la mode pay to play.
For example, I recently read a paper supposedly written by a Chinese dissident virologist, which report was disseminated by a group with questionable membership. Most of the jargon in the report going over my head, I had to wonder if the otherwise convincing verbiage wasn't the work of GPT-3.
I am using motion quite generally, to include the motion of particles, heat, etc. I don't know if the emergent property stuff is proven or discussed much, but I think the field is coming around to it, if for no other reason than they are running out of ideas.
Physics has been working in the top-down direction. That is not how you find emergent properties, it is an attempt to explain things from the properties they seem to possess.
For instance, the relatively gigantic boson is somehow "sub-atomic", to particle physicists. Whereas I think it that particles emerge from the breakdown of the bosonic field, and when we smash together the particles which reveal the boson, we are briefly seeing what happens when we have put them back together. See my comment here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21039542
A very good primer on this is "Intensive Science and Virtual Philosophy" by Manuel DeLanda.
IMHO, GoL is too simple (as Einstein might have said). The machinery GoL can produce is "curious", but overly complicated. IOW, GoL is not complex enough to produce results that can be reasoned about usefully/meaningfully.
They used CNNs in this experiment to learn how far a NN could predict GoL into the future. It can't be done, for GoL is not finite.
Garbage in, garbage out. If you admit dummies, they are not
going to become a genius. The bigger issue for all of us is, now we are not supporting the students who could really move the needle. So the needle doesn't move.
You read the papers correctly, bc those are abstract dimensions, neither time nor space nor precise facial features. Adding another element to an array is changing it's arity, as arguments to a function (which nobody confuses as a function's dimensions).
The chessboard case is an example of mixing disparate, concrete properties, and calling them all dimensions. But that is exactly the error in saying that time is the 4th dimension: mixing the concrete concept of dimension with the abstract one. Blame physicists, for they seem to really think time is our forth dimension, ergo fundamental, whereas time is an emergent property not of spatial dimensions alone, but motion in that space.
Here is an example of purely abstract dimensions. When the researchers at OpenAI want to add the position of words in a sentence, they literally add time, in form of co/sines, to the data. They don't "add" as-in append/concat another dimension to the data, the add as-in sum the existing data with the co/sines, changing the data. They literally merge time into the dimensions of the input. Before and after are temporal, for clocks and words in a string (ie their relative position gives meaningful relativity to the concepts the words represent, or we are lost), but really ALL time is a position WITHIN the dimensions, and the changing of time is the change of position. Ergo time is not additional dimension to the space.
We would not experience time if there was no motion, and objects moving faster experience faster time relative to a slow moving object, as Einstein proved.
Those lines are an aspect of the dimensions of the board, not an addition to them. The measure of time does not make it a dimension (we can measure time in the universe too).