No disrespect meant to Mr. Armstrong, but it's possible it's never listed because it's basically a textbook. It's 295 pages. The rough average of all papers in OP is like 15 pages.
I would say 300 is more than slightly longer. Varies by institution and style, but 100k words, 4-5 collated papers, 100-150 pages maximum are quite common.
I would be concerned as an examiner if this came across my desk, more so if I read the colophon where the author comments that they intended to write their own typesetting system, before reading Knuth and wisely concluding that they were unlikely to do anything better than TeX. Top tier yak shaving there.
> Wikipedia quotes a paper saying people make / recycle around 50 kilograms per day. That would imply that people make around 0.5787 grams per second. But this is in tension with the idea that people use 100 watts at rest. Since that 100 watt number seems to be more strongly established, I think 1 gram per second is a better estimate.
The cited paper in Wikipedia might be accurate and the author is just expecting "at rest" to mean awake but mostly idle. I'd wager that during sleep, we use less than 100W. For the sake of argument if you take out 8 hours (asleep time) from a 24 hour period, you end up with a rate of ~0.8681 grams per second, much closer to 1g/s. Anyway, just a little fun with numbers.
Yeah, I'm starting wonder if this is bs. They don't have a twitter account like the pledge form indicates. The youtuber that purportedly started the campaign only has like 36k subscribers, so it's not clear where such a high level of pledges would be coming from and the rpc endpoint response vs page count is pretty suspicious.
To make the analogy proportional (according to the article), the difference would be something like "do they notice the difference between 1h 40m and 5 hours" (i.e. 3x more). My money would be on yes, they'd very much notice.
> The most common category is that the models make wrong assumptions on your behalf and just run along with them without checking. They also don't manage their confusion, they don't seek clarifications, they don't surface inconsistencies, they don't present tradeoffs, they don't push back when they should, and they are still a little too sycophantic.
Does this not undercut everything going on here. Like, what?
It's predictable so you run defense around it with prompting, validation and model tuning. It generates volumes of working code in seconds from natural language prompts so it's extremely business efficient. We're talking about tools that generate correct code to 95% of a solution, the follow up human and automated test review, and second coding pass to fix the 5% are a non issue.
> You might be thinking "just disable updates, man" or "just install LTSC", or "just run some random debloat script off of GitHub". Why? Why would I jump through all these hoops? I'd rather put in the effort for an OS that knows what consent is and respects me as a user.
The absolute choice quote here. Tattoo it on your forehead.
They have 5 electric leaf blowers available right now. You mentioned you already bought one, but perhaps you could share this info with some of your friends or neighbors to save them the cost. :)
Hello! We do use the EPTL :) that did remind me to donate my old plugin blower though thank you. I will note that EPTL only has plugin blowers and there are good reasons I went with a more mobile blower.
Ah, yeah, I'd suspect they'd only have plugins. Def understand the need for mobility. I never want to miss a chance to share with folks about the existence of EPTL, though. :P
reply