if they use an LLM to make the suggestions then it’s possible it ends up suggesting websites that don’t even exist. or it could accidentally suggest a malware website, or make a typo, etc.

this could be dangerous if they aren’t very careful

from a topological perspective, wraps and tacos are two different beasts.

in a wrap, the bread completely surrounds (and encloses) the other ingredients, so theres a 2-dimensional hole involved (which basically means the inside is hollow).

in a taco, no such wholes are present.

you can also distinguish sandwiches from tacos and wraps (since sandwiches involve two pieces of bread, like you said). but unfortunately, you can’t topologically distinguish a burger from a sandwich

completely agree. and it’s even more insidious when you take into account how he’s spent the past 6 years bragging about how he has a salary of $0 because he’s “only working for the betterment of humanity” or some nonsense like that.

what’s the appeal of haskell? (this is a genuine question.) i’ve been a bit curious about it for a while but haven’t really found the motivation to take a closer look at it.

Board chair Robyn Denholm wrote in a letter included in the regulatory filing: “Elon has not been paid for any of his work for Tesla for the past six years… That strikes us, and the many stockholders from whom we already have heard, as fundamentally unfair.”

Musk’s compensation for 2023 was $0, the filing showed, as the billionaire does not take a salary from the company and is compensated through stock options.

it’s so unfair that elon hasnt gotten a single pay check and has instead had to settle for making billions off of his stock options. think of all the mega yachts and social media companies he could’ve bought if only he had been paid a salary.

Everybody knows what free speech means.

i really dont think so.

free speech is a pretty complicated thing and i feel like many people dont have a solid grasp on it. i think a good number of people think they know what free speech means because they know “it only applies to what the government can do to you”, but there’s quite a bit more to it than that. like how to deal with hate speech, threats, misinformation, disinformation, etc.

and this is directly related to the problems twitter is facing: elon musk started out by saying hes a “free speech absolutist”, but twitter has been slowly rediscovering why “free speech absolutism” doesnt work. and you can see those discoveries in real time with twitter reintroducing moderation policies (among other things)

wall streets only there to draw away suspicion. nobody would suspect wall street to be right in the middle of a communist city

back in my day we only had one language. it was called ASSEMBLY. wanted to make the computer do something? you had to ask it yourself. and that worked JUST FINE

if you’re trying to be malicious, wouldn’t it be better to multiply by Rand() instead of divide by Rand()?

assuming there are a decent number of recorded sales, you’d end up seeing many of the calls to Rand() returning values very close to 0. so, if you’re dividing by those values, you’d end see lots of sales records reporting values in the thousands, millions, or even billions of dollars. i feel like that screams “software bug” more than anything. on the other hand, seeing lots of values multiplied by values close to 0 would certainly look weird, but it wouldn’t be as immediately suspicious.

(of course a better thing would just be to use Rand() on a range other than [0,1])

you could also bring a regular keyboard and try to plug it in when the cashier isn’t looking. i’m sure that will go over well

you seem to be assuming that children have the same logical reasoning faculties that adults do. this is not the case.

i agree that parents should not have a monopoly over the information that their children get, but i think that well-educated school teachers are a better solution to this than the internet. (although this would require the US to put some kind of emphasis on improving its education system, so it’s probably unlikely)

they could get an extra 50 billion if they say “security for children, against terrorists”

did you read the article?

this is going to be devastating for all the prank youtube channels

vr chat

the platform’s most popular post types, the megathread, which is a sort of one-stop-shop for discussions about popular topics. Similar to megathreads, free-form ads are meant to help readers get the information they need quickly. The company says the new ad format would be a good way to do things like launch a product or introduce a brand to a new audience.

imagine seeing a new mega thread each time a brand releases a new flavor of deodorant or something

i agree with everything you’ve said here. and i liked the EPA example. sorry if what i said came across as libertarian, that was not my intention.

i was just trying to push back against the “young people don’t know what’s best for themselves” mentality in the other post.

although, to be clear, i think the current state of social media does have quite a few problems that need addressing, and more regulation on that would certainly be welcome.

you’re taking it as a given that bytedance will sell the app if this law passes. there is a chance that they won’t want to sell and then the app will be banned. (but i think this unlikely.)

also, if i’m understanding things correctly, there’s the possibility that they do sell and the app still gets banned. the article says

An app would be allowed to stay in the US market after a divestiture if the president determines that the sale “would result in the relevant covered company no longer being controlled by a foreign adversary.”

depending on who the next president is, there’s no guarantee that they’ll say any sale will result in the company not being controlled by a foreign adversary. (although this past is just speculation.)

anyways. this bill will certainly raise the chances that the app will be banned in the US. (and it opens the door for other apps to get banned if the US doesn’t like the country they were developed in.)

“protect them from themselves” is what you said. which carries the connotation that they don’t know what’s best for themselves and aren’t qualified to make judgments about those things. this is different from simply “protecting them”.

what are you even trying to say here? that it’s okay for politicians to ignore entire demographics? or that it’s only okay for them to ignore entire demographics if, ultimately, it’s left up to a different group of politicians to pass the law?

i don’t use tiktok or have any interest in the app itself, but it’s still very alarming to see a vote go through 50-0 despite a “nonstop” flood of calls opposing it.