This has got to be my biggest pet peeve among most news organizations. Most links on their articles just go back to an older page on their own website instead of pointing at the actual source.

In most cases, it’s a slam dunk win unless things went really wrong. (say a pandemic)

I think people are severely overestimating how much of an impact being an incumbent actually has with the final results. In smaller elections this definitely has a big impact, but in the entirety of the US history we’ve only had 27 presidents run for reelection, and 9 of them have lost.

That’s a ~67% win rate for incumbent presidents, which isn’t terrible, but isn’t great either, and with a terrible sample size.

Hold up… there is a staircase going upstairs behind the couch!

A very relevant xkcd:

https://xkcd.com/1747/

Yeah, that shark was definitely trying to eat that turtle…

Anyway, the top comment from YouTube is useful:

They put two different clips together. The original is that the turtle was saved from being eaten by the tiger shark, and then after they released the turtle miles away from the shark, the turtle swam down, grabbed a jellyfish or something to eat, and brought it back up to try and “share” his snack with his rescuer. It was adorable. And they showed the entire thing from start to finish in that one, showing it was the same turtle, and the same man right after the rescue.

• @athenadaudelin1993 [11 days ago]

Thanks! It’s a good read and I like the idea of a private cloud compute (PCC) system, but that doesn’t mention anywhere that ChatGPT will be running in that PCC system (if you were trying to imply that).

And while OpenAI could implement something similar to PCC, I haven’t seen them announce that anywhere either.

I’d say the proof is on Apple to show that it’s being done on-device or that all processing is done on iCloud servers.

You’re saying that OpenAI is just going to hand over their full ChatGPT model for Apple to set up on their own servers for free?

But from the article itself:

the partnership could burn extra money for OpenAI, because it pays Microsoft to host ChatGPT’s capabilities on its Azure cloud

I get it if they created a small version of their LLM to run locally, but I would expect Apple to pay a price even for that.

I think you may be confusing this ChatGPT integration with Apple’s own LLM that they’re working on… Again, from the linked article:

Still, Apple’s choice of ChatGPT as Apple’s first external AI integration has led to widespread misunderstanding, especially since Apple buried the lede about its own in-house LLM technology that powers its new “Apple Intelligence” platform.

What? No. I would rather use my own local LLM where the data never leaves my device. And if I had to submit anything to ChatGPT I would want it anonymized as much as possible.

Is Apple doing the right thing? Hard to say, any answer here will just be an opinion. There are pros and cons to this decision and that’s up to the end user to decide if the benefits of using ChatGPT are worth the cost of their data. I can see some useful use cases for this tech, and I don’t blame Apple for wanting to strike while the iron is hot.

There’s not much you can really do to strip out identifying data from prompts/requests made to ChatGPT. Any anonymization of that part of the data is on OpenAI to handle.
Apple can obfuscate which user is asking for what as well as specific location data, but if I’m using the LLM and I tell it to write up a report while including my full name in my prompt/request… that’s all going directly into OpenAIs servers and logs which they can eventually use to help refine/retrain their model at some point.

I’m sure you understand this, but anonymized data doesn’t mean it can’t be deanonymized. Given the right kind of data, or enough context they can figure out who you are fairly quickly.

Ex: You could “Anonymize” gps traces, but it would still show the house you live at and where you work unless you strip out a lot of the info.

http://androidpolice.com/strava-heatmaps-location-identity-doxxing-problem/

Now with LLMs, sure, you could “anonymize” which user said or asked for what… but if something identifying is sent in the request itself, it won’t be hard to deanonymize that data.

I thought I read something earlier today that mentioned that the current deal is that the hostages be returned and then Israel will pull out it’s troops.

Hamas wants to alter it so that they release a few hostages, then Israel pulls out, and then they release the rest of the hostages.

It sounds like Israel had already agreed to that deal so isn’t this in Hamas’ ball park to accept or not?

Then again it sounds like every time the deal is altered, the other side wants to male new changes,

As Blinken mentioned in a different article:

“At some point in a negotiation, and this has gone back and forth for a long time, you get to a point where if one side continues to change its demands, including making demands and insisting on changes for things that it already accepted, you have to question whether they’re proceeding in good faith or not.” https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-hamas-war-ceasefire-negotiations-ab6925549d8f523a6e5c61e88e7eec8a

Has anyone actually published the entire deal (at any stage) in its entirety so that everyone can see what is being debated?

So they already went through some process to be pre-approved by the school board.

Then they forced her to verbally say that she would not participate in the ceremony in order to get her phone so that she could call her parents.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, but it’s unfortunate that there really isn’t a way to go back and re-do your graduation.

Her family argues that the school district had already given her permission to wear them, but officials refuse to budge.
[…]
“My sister was denied from walking at her graduation minutes before her ceremony because school staff would not let her wear traditional Hawaiian lei’s. After getting further approval from the district board to wear them, faculty members further then restricted access to having her phone and forced Sophia, A MINOR, to verbally say she was not going to participate in the ceremony in order for her to contact her parents after the fact,” it reads.

Somewhat similar, this might be a fun thread to ask if anyone has experienced Synesthesia:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia

This is the summary of all the notifications received by each of the students. According to the article we don’t know how many students there were for that specific source image.

I’m on board with some sort of age cap, but it shouldn’t be a specific age/number cutoff.

That number should be dynamic and change according to some other metric like the average life expectancy of someone in that country. Maybe something like 90-95% of the life expectancy of the country?

At least that way we can provide another incentive for politicians to push forward legislation that will help increase the overall life expectancy of the nation as a whole.

Imagine a scale, on one end is a market economy where the government does not regulate it in any way, and does not own any part of it in any way. This is pure capitalism/laissez fair capitalism, whatever you want to call it. And you are correct, it does not exist today in any country (and that’s a good thing in my opinion).

On the other end of that scale would be an economy that is completely controlled/owned/regulated by the government (for example, communism).

In economic terms, every country falls on that scale with some balance between a completely free market economy and how much regulation they impose as well as what kind of industries they control/own.

If someone is going to blame capitalism for “ruining everything” they are basically asking for a market system where everything is controlled/owned by the government. Where monopolies are rampant, and the citizens have no choice except for what the government or dictatorship has decided. In my opinion, this is also a bad choice.

If I am wrong about what they are asking for, feel free to point out the economy of a country that they are saying we should follow. In other words, if not capitalism, what are you asking for?

Also, it is ranked 57th when sorted worst to best. It is sorted at 120th from best to worst. Worse than 119 other nations.

Yes, 57th when sorted from worst to best, I never said otherwise. And your numbers are a little off when sorting the other way around. There are only 162 countries with rankings in that list, so flipping it around puts the U.S. at 105th (behind 104 other nations).
Besides, we’re looking at the Gini Coefficient which (with the countries on this list) has a range of ~23 to ~63, and a score of ~40 is right in the middle of that. In no way is the U.S. at the top of that list, but I still don’t see how you can consider it to be “one of the worst countries in the world for income inequality”.

You’ve invented a thing and then are using your own invention to sort terms that have actual meanings not related to your invented scale

I mean, I’m trying to explain in other terms so that we can understand each other better?

And if I understand this right, you’re saying that it doesn’t make sense to create a scale where:

• one side of it is laissez fair capitalism, a completely free market economy with no government regulation
• the other side is an economy entirely run/controlled by the government with complete government regulation (such as communism)

Communism isn’t a scale

I never said it was a scale. I just placed it at one end of the scale. The scale being “how much control a government has over the market.”

On that scale, the U.S. is mostly capitalist, I have never said otherwise.

Well the U.S. isn’t entirely capitalist either.

On one extreme you have a completely free market economy. On the other extreme you have an economy that’s completely controlled by the government (such as Communism).

A pure free market economy doesn’t really exist anywhere among all the countries, what we have instead are a lot of countries that try to find the right balance between letting the market control itself and having the government control the market.

So call it whatever you want, but the US does have a mixed economy when placed on that scale.

The US gini coefficient is 39.8 as of 2021. Making it one of the worst countries in the world for income inequality.

I don’t know how you can say it’s one of the worst when it’s not even in the bottom third in that list of 162 countries.

According to that source, the worst country is South Africa with a Gini coefficient of 63.0.

The best country is Norway with a Gini Coefficient of 22.7.

The US. Ranks 57th with a Gini coefficient of 39.8.

If anything that places it in the middle rather than “one of the worst”.

When I say pure capitalism, yes, I’m referring to laissez faire capitalism.

I can’t think of any countries that currently have that, and I don’t think we should want that.

Socialism is likely not the best term here, but when I’m referring to it economically I mean in the sense that the government has ownership of some businesses and is regulating other businesses as opposed to what would happen with laissez-faire capitalism.

Perhaps it is better to say that the U.S. is a mix between Capitalism (a market economy) and Communism (a command-based economy) as this article explains? https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/economy.asp

It is one of the worst countries in the world in terms of wealth disparity and income inequality.

That has not been my experience when visiting/living in other countries, but I am curious if you have some data to back this statement up?

Although I do agree that we have a problem with wealth disparity and income inequality.

I think we should look to other countries that have much higher levels of happiness (Such as Sweden) compared to the U.S. and try to imitate what they are doing.

Even in the case of looking to economies like what Sweden has, it is still a mixed economy. So completely doing away with capitalism is not something we should be striving for.

I’m just going off of the definition here:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism

any of various egalitarian economic and political theories or movements advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.

We definitely don’t have a pure capitalist economy since that would mean that there is no government intervention in the market.

And we do have parts of the economy that are owned/run by the government as socialism would suggest.

What would you call it, if not a mix of capitalism and socialism? Maybe a mix of Capitalism and Communism would be more accurate?

This article would seem to suggest that: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/economy.asp

What would you propose as being better than the mix of capitalism and socialism that almost every country already has for their economy?

Both extremes lead to terrible outcomes.