Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | KK7NIL's commentslogin

> The majority of Americans are of British ancestry

No they aren't. Even if you narrow it down just to white Americans, British ancestry is almost even with German and does not hold a majority once you include Irish, Italian, etc. [1]

I don't blame you for thinking they are tough, as Anglo culture and language has been unusually dominant, probably because the original 13 colonies were very Anglo and the whites that trickled in later largely assimilated. "Albion's seed" is an interesting book on this topic.

[1]: https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2023/10/2020-census-d...

Edit: British doesn't usually denote an ethnic group so I took it to mean Anglo, but if you take it to mean Anglo+Celtic then it would indeed make a majority of whites in the US due to the very large Irish population.


Sorry, yeah, I meant the majority of Whites and I should have said British Isles. Thank you for correcting what I said, which was indeed wildly inaccurate. I do think British ancestry is underreported because of an exoticism bias but we can ignore that.

> I do think British ancestry is underreported because of an exoticism bias but we can ignore that.

That's fair but I'll also point out that pan-Germanic (including Nordic) ancestry is actually the majority in many Midwest and West coast states, while the northeast is obviously very Anglo. So you can get a very different impression depending where you spend your time.


> We call AI models "open source" if you can download the binary and not the source.

Who's "we"? There's been quite a lot of pushback on this naming scheme from the OSS community, with many preferring the term "open weights".


Yep, ruff has a warning for this exact issue.


Pylint has had it too for at least a decade.



"Fortunately, machines will never be as good as human chess players."


This holds true


Subjective vs objective. Also, analogies are almost always weak rhetorical distractions. The conversation just becomes about the differences between the two things. If you want to state an opinion about X, form the thought about X, rather than just pointing to Y and asserting they're the same.


> Subjective vs objective.

We've already reached the point where GAI art is extremely difficult to distinguish from human art and at a fraction of that cost.

I'd say that's pretty objective and it's hard to even leave room for subjective interpretation when it's so hard to tell them apart.

> Also, analogies are almost always weak rhetorical distractions.

I wasn't trying to start a discussion with them. To say GAI will never be better than humans at art when we already know what we know today isn't a good faith logical argument, it's a tautological appeal to emotion.


>where GAI art is extremely difficult to distinguish from human art and at a fraction of that cost.

And this logic is why people don't understand how to make good game art. generating an 2d animation or real time 3d model that properly deforms is multiple magnitudes different from fooling some tiktok users with a static image in isolation. even composing a still scene will quickly reveal the lmitations of generating art for your visual novel.

Wielding a camera doesn't make you a cinematographer that can sell a movie. Generating a few realistic-ish images does not make you an artist that can sell a game.


The internet is a "federated" network though, so their point still applies.


No, Ergo doesn't have netsplits because there isn't anything to split with. The point does not apply.


There are events that may affect more than one machine which are not netsplits.

e.g. an ISP with common users experiences an outage, an IRC client with common users has a bug, common users within the same time zone have automated system updates run at the same time, the IRC server experiences an upstream network disruption affecting only some routes, a regional power outage occurs, a hosted bouncer service with common users has an outage, etc, etc, etc...


Indeed, it's not even the same between pieces!

Kings have Chebysev geometry while Rooks have taxicab geometry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicab_geometry#See_also

It's left as an exercise for the reader to figure out the geometry of the remaining pieces.


Rooks don't have taxicab geometry. Their metric space is compact even on an infinite board. I think you're thinking of the wazir: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wazir_(chess)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chebyshev_distance for kings, but on a clear board the rook distance between any two squares is 1 or 2, whereas with Taxicab it could be as much as 14.


Wikipedia is infamously bad at teaching math.

This Veritasium video does a great job at explaining how such skewed priors can easily appear in our current academic system and the paradox in general: https://youtu.be/42QuXLucH3Q?si=c56F7Y3RB5SBeL4m


Worth noting that GPIB is still very common in labs and present in modern lab equipment that's still in production. Tek's AFG31000 is one example but there's countless more.

Mil/gov customers are still die-hard GPIB users and that's a major sector for T&M sales.


Indeed. Keysight's top-of-the-line long-scale DMM, the 3458A, was redesigned (chiefly for RoHS compliance) in 2019 and the GPIB bus remains the only means to remote control that instrument.


To be fair, that's a small redesign of a 40 year old design (everything is still through hole, for example).

The AFG31k is a brand new design from the ground up and it still has GPIB! And it's far from an isolated case, GPIB has a strong network effect, pun intended.


APIs are always about people, they're an implicit contract. This is also why API design is largely the only difficult part of software design (there are tough technical challenges too sometimes, but they are much easier to plan for and contain).


TIL about a large moss green flightless parrot :)


I'm impressed you have never encountered :partyparrot: in your work Slack.


They're also nocturnal!


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

Search: