agroot12's comments

I might be missing something, but it would be great if the charts would show inference speed, model size (required VRAM) and quality (benchmark results) in one. It might be that the same quality and speed and size can be attained by just quantizing, perhaps with added fine-tuning, without the sparseness. The post seems to imply that their method is better, but if that's the case, they could show that.

You are right that it is unlikely that one candidate gets the number of votes that exactly matches a certain percentage with one decimal (1:10.000 as per the source article).

But it's even more unlikely and astonishing that the second candidate also gets a number of votes corresponding to a percentage with one decimal!

This is highly suspicious if the vote counts are presented as official result.

But as mentioned in the comments, we cannot be sure that someone was given the total vote count, and the percentages rounded to one decimal, and thought it would be helpful to recalculate how many votes each candidate must have gotten.

This is from his Schiller speech https://www.dla-marbach.de/ueber-uns/marbacher-schillerreden...

and the translator cut the interwoven parts about the CIA's Stargate program, for the better in my opinion.

But through Twitter/X's ad revenue sharing, money you spend on Apple products goes into marketing on Twitter/X, and finances Nazis.

Using tiktokenizer, these are only two tokens: quote-colon is token 498, space-quote is token 330 (as per https://tiktokenizer.vercel.app/ ). But I agree to the general argument.

I think what factors in even more when you use the API is that you do not have fine-grained control over the generation process. If you follow the MS guidance approach, you fill in structured text yourself, and then let the model generate only the value parts, e.g. up to the next quote. To do that more or less word by word, you have multiple API calls, and have to be very smart about providing the right stop tokens.

"After that, participants solved mentally active programming tasks (coding) and monotonous ones (debugging)" ... this is a surprising take. Debugging, as the saying goes, is often like a murder mystery. Edit: I dont' think the authors are wrong about that, since they have observed the participants, I assume they chose a monotonous debugging task.

Maybe I am an optimist, but I'd say Vaadin is mostly Open Source (Apache License). You can build complete web applications with the open source version. Only some advanced components (e.g. an Excel-like grid, a WYSIWYG editor, Highcharts components) are proprietary and require a subscription for development, while the builds can be freely distributed.

But confusingly it is captioned "Photograph: Albert Sneppen/Reuters"

BMW sales do not seem shrinking to me: They boast 35 consecutive quarters of growth [1] and sold more cars year over year, at least in 2014-2017 [2], don't know about 2018, as it's not yet in the statistics.

[1] https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/global/article/detail/T028306...

[2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/264342/global-sales-volu...

This is a fallacy - for all we know, SF might be spending that money to help 20,000 people to find homes, and 7,500 homeless people are still left or newly homeless.

Same as serverless.

I think it would be much better if the screen reader could use sounds for punctuation, like the sound of a typewriter typing to indicate a dot, and some meep-like sound with the frequency goes up for an opening parenthesis, and down for a closing parenthesis.

The page you link to <https://jitsi.org/downloads/> contains (mostly) instructions on how to install jitsi-meet on your server for a self-hosted WebRTC videoconferencing solution.

This does not include the older 'jitsi' named softphone / voip client, meaning there will be no jitsi command that can be executed.

Installation of jitsi-meet was straightforward for me, exactly as oulined on their page:

- first, add their repository to your apt sources.list

- then apt update && apt upgrade

- then apt install jitsi-meet

You should end up with a running web server hosting your own jitsi-meet instance.

I've installed it with a letsencrypt cert... you have to convert it to pkcs#12 with openssl and move it to /etc/jitsi/videobridge/ .

For Jitsi Meet, you don't have to install anything on a PC but a WebRTC capable browser. On iOS, you (still) need an app, although Safari is starting to support WebRTC natively.

Java on the server is a safe language. I agree that any browser plugin affects security and usability negatively, and the Java browser plugin was a nightmare.

Jitsi Meet can record server-side with Jibri <https://github.com/jitsi/jibri>, although that is still experimental.

exactly. un-teaching mankind how to fish.

It is a security problem for the recipient.

Imagine a dissident / whistle blower / journalistic source using gpg. I could send her a message, signed with a new key, and just wait until her gpg executable contacts my server.

Then I have her IP address, and if I am lucky, I can plant an exploit into the very first request response.

I logged in to post exactly this. How great would be a piece by Mickens with that title?

For all HN readers that don't know Mickens yet: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6905536

Thanks for pointing that out, my first thought was the goal is to decode a bit pattern from the flickering neon sign mp4! That would have been some wasted time...

You mean we should fact check the unsealed emails?

Let me quote one of the more explicit parts of the article:

> Court records show that Monsanto was tipped off to the determination by a deputy division director at the E.P.A., Jess Rowland, months beforehand. That led the company to prepare a public relations assault on the finding well in advance of its publication. Monsanto executives, in their internal email traffic, also said Mr. Rowland had promised to beat back an effort by the Department of Health and Human Services to conduct its own review.

> Dan Jenkins, a Monsanto executive, said in an email in 2015 that Mr. Rowland, referring to the other agency’s potential review, had told him, “If I can kill this, I should get a medal.” The review never took place. In another email, Mr. Jenkins noted to a colleague that Mr. Rowland was planning to retire and said he “could be useful as we move forward with ongoing glyphosate defense.”

For me, this qualifies as 'big evil corporation' behavior. [edited: formatting]