The "current crisis" is manufactured and amplified externally. Nobody is doxxing Tesla owners with maps using Molotov cocktails as map cursors or burning lots full of vehicles in for service in some way that is a function of whether Musk is personally present on the factory floor vs doing something else he thinks is vital to our economic survival. All of it is ginned up hate based on the politics surrounding the pruning of vast left slush funds and debt-funded waste that has to go away. That's an entire industry with vested interests, and acting against it certainly brings out the coordinated hate, attacks on stock value, media smearing, and of course thousands of people who now say he's a nazi though they can't actually articulate why they think that.

No, him being "on the factory floor" or off it doesn't precipitate some "current crisis," except in the sense that entrenched interests currently having their oxen gored by drying up things like the NGO money laundering industry are doing their best to try to wreck the company to make a point.

Is missing the point. Calling CO2 a pollutant just engenders a mindless political pollution control response that is out of line with a reasonable assessment of the issue. CO2, oxygen, nitrogen, water, and sunlight are the core cycle of life on the planet.

At the very least, if you want me to take the point seriously, stop referring to CO2 as a pollutant.

So the people who made it should have been earning minimum wage, is that your point? Spread that dollar amount across five and half yeads and even modest team of people and their overhead, and they're making middle five figures after taxes. Is that a lot, to you?

If something doesn't happen in the first 15 minutes that tells me it's worth watching I'm out. There's too much stuff to watch for me to spend longer than that. Breaking Bad was compelling from the opening sequence so I'm not sure where this article is coming from.

No show is worth waiting 4 episodes to get good. This isn't the 70s through the 00s. There's too many options to waste that much time.

Doesn't mean I won't come back to a show if it can generate 'buzz'.

It took five and a half years to make it. So, in perhaps over-simplified terms, that's ~$670k year working on it. Let's say you had six people working on the project, and had NO overhead at all beyond their personal income while making it. That's roughly $100k per person before they paid taxes, which is either pretty good or not very good at all, depending on where you live and how. But one supposes they also had some overhead. This wasn't done on their kids' laptops at night. There was music to compose, audio to record and design, and a lot more.

So, yeah. "Just" 3.7M is a fair characterization.

The only problem with this is you have to go stand in the sunlight to charge it.

No, we just voted the tyrannical little statists out of office. And the people you're now laughably calling Fascists are busy exposing and tearing down the very tools that an actual Fascist government would (and did) use. Fascists don't cut off the cash supply to money-laundering NGOs that are making their pet politicians richer and more personally powerful. Fascists don't work to shut down the mechanisms by which the government can censor your social media use. Your case of projection is pretty impressive.

You know what Fascists do? They try to hide the money movement that keeps their circle of power functioning. Our little lefty statists are busy shrieking that the lead of the executive branch shouldn't be allowed to see the records showing where the executive branch has been writing checks. Gee, what would they be hiding? Their little circle of industrial-scale grift and waste and abuse is getting exposed, and they're furious about it. And here you are having their backs. Pretty ugly. Do you live off of dubious international grant kickbacks or something?

Connecting to Google News today tells me all I need to know about fact-checking.

All four of the 'fact-checks' today on my Google News feed are about the resignation of Justin Trudeau. All four make reference to viral videos that show crowds cheering after his resignation and the 'fact-check' is on an altered video. No one would ever mistake that for an actual event.

Though there was no actual cheering, Trudeau's popularity rating is the lowest for a PM for a very long time and public sentiment is against him.

Why would four major fact-checking organizations make this same fact check if not to try and suppress a viral video that no one will mistake for the truth but actually aligns with public sentiment? The effect of fact checking on social media platforms in this case would be to suppress a highly entertaining video that the majority of viewers would find entertaining and humorous. Some users of platforms might feel saddened that their preferred choice for leader is on his way out but that's not a societal problem; it's an individual one.

Zuckerberg's statement that fact-checking organizations are biased is a truthful statement. Whether ceasing to rely on them provides a better platform for more people is yet to be determined.

Fact checking organizations have only themselves to blame for their reduced impact on society.

Yes, Twitter was much better when someone in the Biden administration could write an email to a partisan activist working there and get people perma-banned for expressing doubt that Biden was handling things well. The good ol' days, right? Or are you just mad that now there are Community Notes calling the lying left out on the propaganda BS they used to choke Twitter with, and had Twitter staff available to ban anyone who called them out on it? Yeah, that must be frustrating for you.

Every single bit of shrill shriekery I hear that comes anywhere close to that on my X feed comes from the wanna-be tyrants on the left who crave the power to silence other people rather than counter things they don't want to hear with better thoughts of their own. Your own absurd ad hominem right here in this post is a great example of the craven screaming. I'm sure you liked that the Democrats - who called people deplorable garbage - used to be able to silence anyone who pointed out their duplicity and corruption.

Yes, when prominent Democrats talk out loud about sending people away for reprogramming, it's nice indeed to be able to speak out loud about it. Obviously, you'd prefer that people talking about that and sharing videos of people like Clinton saying it were silenced, just the way those prominent Democrats like it. Someone pointed out their creepy policy wishes? Cancel them! Just they way YOU'D like it, right?

Yes, when the Biden family rakes in millions of dollars from China and Russia and spreads it around the in-laws and the kids and dodges taxes on it while visibly selling federal policy actions, or the DNC launders millions of dollars in foreign money through Act Blue to try to buy Harris a presidency, or Nancy Pelosi becomes worth untold millions through blatant insider trading, it's nice to be able to talk about it instead of being silenced. I know, you'd prefer such conversations were silences, like in the good ol' days when Twitter had federal agents with offices in their HQ, ready to Orwell for you.

What are you talking about? Tens of thousands of deaths from fentanyl, crime, and human trafficking over the border deliberately opened wide by Biden's handlers? Untold thousands dead in wars that broke out only once his handlers signaled weakness and wars broke out on his watch? Yes, it's nice to be able to have open conversations about all of those lives lost, instead of such speech being muzzled by people like you, and those you obey.

What a ridiculous take on what he said. His point isn't that SpaceX faked anything, it's that China's quest for street cred in their scramble to catch up means making it look like they're hip, and honest, and open about their process (in, of course - it being China - the most controlled and dishonest way imaginable). Right up to and including faking R&D mishaps to show how hard they're working.

Anyone even remotely connected to contemporary image making can see that's obviously CGI. Looks like something straight out of DCS or the like. No chance that's real. Might be based on actual telemetry, but it's deep, deep down in the Uncanny Valley, and any reasonably worldly person can see that in an instant. Their motivation for showing the the challenges of developing such a program - including faking something like this to perhaps skew perceptions of how far along they actually are - are up for debate and academic. The footage is plainly fake.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.helibacon.com%2F

They have all their permits.

These types of draconian laws will ruin the internet if they are ratified.

kvezach writes: To put it differently: suppose that the text was 10 bytes long.

A better way of thinking about data scaling is to ask "How many digits of Pi would it take before, say, John Tromp's 401-bit binary lambda algorithm that generates Pi would become a better model than the literal string of those apparently-random digits?" (And by "better" I mean not only that it would be shorter than those digits, but that it would extrapolate to (ie: "predict") the next digit of Pi.)

In terms of how much data humans require, this is, as I said, something about which everyone has an opinion (including obviously you, to which you are of course entitled) but on which there is no settled science: Hence the legitimacy of the 1GB limit on a wide range of human knowledge for research purposes.

Concerns about the bias implied by "The Hardware Lottery" are not particularly relevant for engineering/business decisions, but path dependencies implicit in the economics of the world are always suspect as biasing research directions away from more viable models and, in the present instance, meta-models.

There is only one Hutter Prize contest and it's for 1GB. 100MB was the original size for the Hutter Prize starting in 2006, but it was increased to 1GB in 2020, along with a factor of 10 increase in the payout per incremental improvement. See the "Hutter Prize History".

Insofar as the size is concerned: The purpose of the Hutter Prize is research into radically better means of automated data-driven model creation, not biased by what Sara Hooker has called "The Hardware Lottery". One of the primary limitations on current machine learning techniques is their data efficiency is low compared to that which natural intelligence is speculated to attain by some theories. Everyone has their opinion, of course, but it is far from "settled science". In particular, use of ReLU activation seems to indicate machine learning currently relies heavily on piece-wise linear interpolation in construction of its world model from language. Any attempt to model causality has to identify system dynamics (including cognitive dynamics) to extrapolate to future observations (ie: predictions) from past observations (ie: "the data in evidence"). Although there is reason to believe Transformers can do something like dynamics within their context windows despite using ReLU (and that this is what gives them their true potential for "emergence at scale") it wasn't until people started going to State Space Models that they started returning to dynamical systems identification (under another name, as academics are wont to gratuitously impose on their fields).