I would guess they do it because they want to minimize the chance that someone will install an unapproved app to someone’s phone and cause harm. I know it’s already pretty hard but Apple seems to be very particular when it comes to this.
That’s an opinion. Apple’s take is that they sell ”everything that runs on your phone has gone through our reviews, so you can trust it isn’t malware”
That, in their opinion, makes it their job to prevent people from permanently installing software on other people’s phones. I’m sure they would remove the “permanently” if they could, but developers have to test builds so frequently that they can’t review them all.
I recently spent 2 weeks fixing a project that a senior engineer seemingly vibe coded while I was on holiday. Prior to that, their work output was excellent in terms of quality and pace.
Those 2 weeks were absolute hell for me. I estimate I had to rewrite about 90% of the code. Everything was cobbled together and ultimately disposable. Unfortunately, this work was meant to be the first of several milestones and was completely unsalvageable as a foundation for the project.
I'm not opposed to using AI tools, I use them myself. But being on the receiving end and having to deal with someone else's vibe coded rubbish is truly dreadful.
I am opposed to them. I'm tired of being pushed by people who don't understand the profession to use crappy tools to be unrealistically productive. I hate what their presence has done to the industry and to the expectations placed on us.
The Australian open runs for two weeks, solely in January, so you can subscribe for a single month. ~$12 is roughly the price of a single beer at a game. If you can get 2 weeks of entertainment for $12, I think that’s reasonable.
Having seen this generation at music festivals, I kind of disagree. I feel like the current generation go really hard on drugs.
In Australia, nightclub entry can be expensive, ranging from $20-50 per club. 10 years ago, you’d club hop, maybe going to 3-4 clubs from 11pm until 7am. These days, it’s not worth it. Drinks are like $12-16 for a basic mixed drink. A lot of patrons just drink at home, then drink (free) water and take MDMA and/or ketamine at clubs, which is significantly cheaper than a night of buying drinks.
One thing I like about Berlin is that some clubs explicitly forbid photos. Staff place stickers on the front and back cameras when you enter. Anyone spotted taking photos is kicked out.
Definitely, don't know why not more places are like that. The majority if techno clubs does it.
There is a reason more clubs are also dark etc.. not only to hide the maybe existing wasted faces, but also to completely let go and dissolve in the music, this is very necessary.
Wow, this seems ridiculous. The expected answer is basically finding a loophole in the problem. I can imagine how worthless all of these models would be if they behaved that way.
Look at U.S. factories now vs the 1980s - way fewer workers but making more stuff. Yeah, companies moved jobs overseas, but they also went big on automation to boost efficiency. That's a huge reason factory jobs disappeared.
As for COVID origins, let's not perpetuate unproven theories.
I think we are paying too much attention to the political opening of China and not enough to the economic factors affecting the US Dollar at the time. We are right to blame Nixon, not for opening up China, but for closing the doors to Fort Knox with the Nixon Shock in ending US-Dollar gold convertability. This resulted in high inflation and a devaluing of the dollar via a floating exchange rate. This made US exports cheap (easier to export), but for other countries assets in dollars fell in exchange-value, and their exports became more expensive (harder to export). This happened at the same time as the OPEC crisis, so Carter was facing a failing economy with extreme inflation. And by appointing Volcker who hiked interest rates to stop the inflation, caused a recession and a permanent deindustrialization of the US as well as dozens of countries with US assets going bankrupt. We ended up embracing a deficit economy powered by financialization, but since countries like China had didn't have dollar assets, didn't face austerity measures and structural adjustment programs from the IMF, and were industrialized, they could take up all the lost manufacturing that the US was willing to lose in order to maintain global hegemony in other ways.
> The committee’s 520-page report, released on 2 December, offers no new direct evidence of a lab leak, but summarizes a circumstantial case, including that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) used NIAID money to conduct “gain-of-function” studies that modified distantly related coronaviruses.
> Democrats on the panel released their own report challenging many of their colleagues’ conclusions about COVID-19 origins. They conclude, for example, that the viruses studied at WIV with EcoHealth funding were too distantly related to SARS-CoV-2 to cause the pandemic.
In other words, it's the same partisan politics we've seen since 2020, with very little science sprinkled on top.
I believe we grossly fumbled investigating the origin of the virus, but unfortunately this report does little to present new, conclusive evidence.
The house panel report is profoundly flawed and used as a political piece more than as a means of real inquiry.
And the fact a lot of people from the US believe it originated from the lab doesn't really make it true. See how many people believe you didn't go on the moon or that 9/11 was an inside job.
It _could_ have originated from the lab, it's a distinct possibility, but there is no concrete proof. We do know it's not created using a gene drive though.
> Nothing unproven about covid coming out of wuhan lab
The burden of proof lies on those making the claim of a lab origin. In scientific investigation, the party proposing a particular explanation must provide evidence to support it, rather than others having to disprove it.
> House panel concludes that COVID-19 pandemic came from a lab leak
The findings of this report are in dispute. There is still no definitive evidence that COVID-19 originated in a lab.
> Two-thirds of Americans believe that the COVID-19 virus originated from a lab in China
The number of people who believe something has no bearing on whether it's factually true. History is full of examples where the majority was wrong. People once widely believed the Earth was flat and the sun revolved around us. Scientific truth is determined by evidence and rigorous research, not popular opinion or consensus.
FTA: "Two-year probe led by Republicans faults agencies for pandemic response, as Democrats on panel challenge final report’s findings on SARS-CoV-2’s origin"
Yeah, the lying-ass republicans repeating the same bullshit Russian-made talking points, meanwhile the Democrats who aren't on the dole disagree.
What gullible Americans "believe" on some random poll site doesn't matter. Belief in something doesn't make it true.
"Given what we now know, investigators should follow their strongest leads and subpoena all exchanges between the Wuhan scientists and their international partners, including unpublished research proposals, manuscripts, data and commercial orders. In particular, exchanges from 2018 and 2019"
That House panel report is a joke. They massively cherry pick evidence to praise everything Trump did and condemn everything Biden did.
For example, they praise Trump's travel restrictions for saving lives. To support this they cite a single study, which didn't even study COVID. It was a study that used computer models of the spread of other diseases to see if travel restrictions are useful. That's an interesting and useful type of study, but it isn't anywhere near conclusive.
Compare to masks, which they conclude are worthless. They acknowledge that the CDC provided them a list of over a dozen studies that were specifically of mask use in regard to COVID, but they completely dismiss all of them because they were observational studies, not randomized controlled trials.
Here's an article that gives more details on the deficiencies of that report, including the deficiencies in its claims about COVID origins [1].
For me, it's allowing me to do things I wouldn't have even attempted before. I'm writing in languages I've never written in before (python) and dealing with stuff I've never dealt with before (multicast UDP). This isn't complicated stuff by any stretch, but AI means I can be highly productive in python without needing to spend any time learning python.
Claude web’s context window is 200K tokens. I’d be surprised if GitHub Copilot’s context window exceeds 10K.
I’ve found using Claude via Copilot in VS Code produces noticeably lower quality results than 3.5 Sonnet on web. In my experience Claude web outdoes GPT-4o consistently.
I’m paying $240 a year to Anthropic that I wasn’t paying before and it’s worth it. While I don’t use Claude every single day, but I use it several times a day when I’m working. More times than the free tier allows.
Why do people say this like it's a refutation? Current valuation and investments were not based on getting a very small group of nerds (affectionately) on HN to pay $250/yr which probably doesn't cover even inference costs for the models let alone training and R&D
reply