Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | tomaskafka's commentslogin

Thank you! Isn’t it amazing how a rigid hierarchical categorization system fails everywhere you actually look into details? See also category theory vs prototype theory.

It's amazing that most people don't realize it, and even in higher education you get people believing in taxonomies and categories as if they were a property of the natural world. There are no categories in the objective reality, rigid or otherwise; there are no metadata tags attached to elementary particles, that say what the arrangement they're part of is, and of what type it is. Whether in biology or in code, taxonomies are arbitrary - they're created by people for some specific purpose, and judged by useful they are in serving that purpose.

You'd think that now that we have LLMs, the actual in-your-face empirical evidence of a system that can effectively navigate the complexities of the real world without being fed, or internally developing, rigid ontologies, that people would finally get the memo - but alas.


Indeed, one of the epistemological lessons for me when confronting the power of LLMs is that a sort of "intellectual capability" can emerge in any system, from sheer scale/complexity alone.

If you're interested, check out Rupert Sheldrake:

https://www.sheldrake.org/files/pdfs/papers/Is_the_Sun_Consc...


It's the same people complaining tomato is fruit, so it must not be a vegetable.

Relatedly I just noticed potato fruit (potato berries) the other day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato_fruit

Part of the same Solanaceae/nightshade family also includes bell peppers and eggplants. To help confuse the Tomato plant and the Tomato vegetable further.


Well, no, what we're saying here is that if you use a rigid, hierarchical catergorisation system (cladistics) you can say that there is no such monophyletic grouping as a fish. Ie there is no grouping with a common ancestor that encompasses all the things, and only the things, that we commonly call fish. That system hasn't failed, it's fine, its purpose is to categorise things in terms of evolutionary descent. However, under that system humans are reptiles and trees and fish aren't useful categories. There exist other systems of catergorisation, which are polyphyletic or paraphyletic, which fit better with commonly used language, and we get back fish, trees, non-avian non-mammalian reptiles. Neither of them are wrong, they're just differently used and differently useful. It's like knowing that a tomato is a fruit, but nobody wants it in a fruit salad. People tend to struggle when things exist in multiple naming systems and categories for some reason.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think humans are reptiles, phylogenetically. The Synapsida (containing mammals) and Sauropsida (containing reptiles) are sibling groups inside the Amniota.

AFAIK - Synapsida were originally termed mammal-like reptiles before the Amniota group was applied.

You're probably right I'm no expert

Agree. Latour's got neat arguments too (commenting on Pandora's Hope)

“Wasn’t the system supposed to be fixed?“

Why would it be fixed? Insurance companies aren’t willing to invest in oversight, and everyone else profit, there is no incentive for changing the system.


Nepal is a low income and high corruption country, where the government and formal business structures are unstable enough that 'tipping' becomes common even for government investigators...

It's basically a way for everyone to get more tourists dollars, which is one of Nepals primary exports.


My travel health insurance lately warns of Egyptian hospitals and doctors trying to charge absurd amounts for simple procedures for tourists, and pressuring them to pay, arguing they can get it back from their insurance. Similar story.

Why don't they just charge [more] for a mountain license? A few thousand per hiker would probably be tolerated by people who view the hike as a lifetime achievement kind of thing.

There’s far more tourists in Nepal who are trekking than mountaineering. And those tourists are going to be much more price sensitive. It’s not just wealthy Americans, but people from all over the world - India, China, middle income countries etc. All those people are spending money in tea houses and hiring local guides.

They do charge quite a lot for mountain climbing permits but trekking is mostly just walking from village to village along the usual paths the locals use.

Scamming bored rich people is one of the more victimless crimes.

Idk they gave SBF 25 years for it.

How can it possibly be defined as victimless

In my experience people use “victimless” to mean “the victims are people I lack sympathy for”.

If the cost to an individual insurance company is low enough (in the few millions) and they're not really at risk of it suddenly exploding, and the cost for them to mitigate is also in the millions (or risks killing a customer), they're unlikely to improve. Fight Club, but the other way around.

However, if they all gang up together they might do something - but that can cause other issues (a local insurer becomes the only insurance available, etc).


Just include helicopter rides in the ticket. These aren't adventures anymore - just "natural" theme parks for monied elites that need talking points and social media posts flexing their wealth. Does Six Flags charge your insurance for security to drive you back to your car?

One very important aspect is that we learn through haptics and precise arm movements required to write/draw things down.

Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d'enculé de ta mère.

It's like wiping your arse with silk.

Everyone’s (well, except Anthropic, they seem to have preserved a bit of taste) approach is the more data the better, so the databases of stolen content (erm, models) are memorizing crap.

> Our previous credit-based billing model charged the same rate for both simple and complex requests.

Exactly. That's why I was using your VC money as the cheapest source of tokens available.


I am not the OP, but I got an $150 (at a time) fanless quad core Celeron box at Aliexpress about 5 years ago, and it just runs with zero problems with openmediavault and dockers. Attached is external HDD over USB 3, it’s still fast enough (and the HDD is the bottleneck, not the USB interface).


Few months ago it was possible to get Intel N100 (i5-6400 performance at much lower power) based mini PC with 8GB RAM and 256GB SSD for 100-120 USD on sale. Unfortunately, 'rampocalypse' happened.


I wonder if I can run this on a 2 year old celeron laptop


You can run this on a 10 year old celeron laptop.


I got the same info. Windows kernel is developed for B2B needs, if something might be useful to B2C, they might eventually get it, but they don’t affect the roadmap.


Psst, they already managed to turn the start menu into something that won’t load under one second if you don’t have 3 GB/s NVME drive, and for a while even didn’t respect Fitts law.


Window with Hello cameras can basically do this today.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: