It's quite easy to check responses to other customers in other threads there, and somehow I see quite a lot of "oh, go to that other support" and ghosting.

If you create support ticket on hacker news, then yes, you will probably get it waved. It's somewhat sad that HN is their support forum now.

It would make even more sense to rename it to ollama, get a copyright for the name, and see how thieves complain they've been robbed :>

So basically they got fined a cost of single tractor repair, and it didn't even create a legal precedent due to settlement? Someone believed that "will make available" has any consequences, given decades-long tradition to just ignore such agreements? Well, great.

The statement is a bit too strong. It's not malice, it's just plain old stupidity. In the same way as soviet nuclear reactors don't explode, nuclear submarines don't either. Nobody have thought it might happen, nobody was aware, and no special "on call" service for recovering people from sunk submarine ever existed. _Of course_, it would never happen in just 6 hours.

In the same way, if you don't have anyone on-call to recover the backend along with backups and recovery plans, the chance to have production up and running in 6 hours will be zero.

In case of a way more physical thing of "submarine sunk in polar cold waters", it'd take a good 4 hours just to get _something_ there. Not to mention extracting a person from 300ft involves a good plan on avoiding decompression sickness, and you can't really bring a 50-ton decompression bell on a helicopter and hover for half a day. I can hardly imagine what would such a disaster recovery plan even be.

It would be unfair to form such a generalized opinion from a single incident, even it that incident was quite brutal.

However, 4 years of following RU military attempts to take over Ukraine have reinforced my belief that RU army doesn’t give two shits about its personnel. They got plenty of people, and their value seems to exclusively correlate with the person’s usefulness towards the Tsar, which at an individual level is generally zero.

Well, that's precisely what is sinister here.

Those profiling tools don't really care which features are going to be used for predictions. It's just machine learning, and it's indiscriminate. So if you have an extension that correlates with you being Muslim, it will be used for whatever ML predictions they give to other companies, and the worst case will be another "oh we didn't do this intentionally".

Of course, that's not the first time this ever happened in human history, so even if it's not "something inherently sinister", it's just "criminal negligence".

It's actually a strange situation. Tao is the only high-profile mathematician who tries to resolve the reproducibility crisis in math by popularizing proof checkers, and who used LLMs in probably the most legitimate way: to produce formal undeniable proofs with them, that cannot really suffer from LLMs being wrong all the time.

On the other hand, I still find content and arguments he produces to be quite weak, and honestly it's getting annoying to hear them that often. It's the case when he could really get some help of a ghost writer who is more experienced in popularization, otherwise this repetition might cause some serious harm instead.

Thanks for breaking it down in a balanced way.

In fact, the paper has an error in the argument that AI might find Fermat's theorem to be incorrect due to definition of natural numbers including a zero, because paper's version of a theorem explicitly says that the number should be greater than two, and zero cannot be greater than two.

Surprisingly, this mistake proves the author's point that human can implicitly understand what was said, and that it still has value to it, even if it's incorrect.

The paper explicitly states that n is greater than 2, but the issue is whether a,b,c can be 0.

In ye olden days of WASM just added to the browser, the difference between native JS and boost::spirit in WASM was x200.

In their worst case it was just x5. We clearly have some progress here.

The word "Polymarket" can be replaced by "market" there.

Global market is just the largest gambling venue. Always has been. No amount of "monitoring" and "leagues" will keep people from going Boeing whistleblower way.

The "market" isn't a zero-sum-game though. Polymarket is.

I don't see how this is a counterargument.

I would rather say that lack of VBA support is an issue, and that it's an insurmountable task for alternative Offices to solve. Yes, and absurd one too.

As a "poweruser", I'd rather prefer to have all software available in the browser, open source, and hackable, than a native-based COM-ridden turd that only became more bloated and slow over the last couple of decades. (Yeah, and don't forget Ribbon UI!)

Unfortunately, Office EU is about politics, and not about hackable open-source software available with a single click.