gamer

This doesn't account for blinking.

If your friend blinks, they won't see the light, and thus would be unable to verify whether the method works or not.

But how does he know when to open his eyes? He can't keep them open forever. Say you flash the light once, and that's his signal to keep his eyes open. Okay, but how long do you wait before starting the experiment? If you do it immediately, he may not have enough time to react. If you wait too long, his eyes will dry out and he'll blink.

This is just not going to work. There are too many dependent variables.

There's so much misinfo spreading about this, and while I don't blame you for buying it, I do blame you for spreading it. "It sounds legit" is not how you should decide to trust what you read. Many people think the earth is flat because the conspiracy theories sound legit to them.

DeepSeek probably did lie about a lot of things, but their results are not disputed. R1 is competitive with leading models, it's smaller, and it's cheaper. The good results are definitely not from "sheer chip volume and energy used", and American AI companies could have saved a lot of money if they had used those same techniques.

The model weights and research paper are

I think you're conflating "open source" with "free"

What does it even mean for a research paper to be open source? That they release a docx instead of a pdf, so people can modify the formatting? Lol

The model weights were released for free, but you don't have access to their source, so you can't recreate them yourself. Like Microsoft Paint isn't open source just because they release the machine instructions for free. Model weights are the AI equivalent of an exe file. To extend that analogy, quants, LORAs, etc are like community-made mods.

To be open source, they would have to release the training data and the code used to train it. They won't do that because they don't want competition. They just want to do the facebook llama thing, where they hope someone uses it to build the next big thing, so that facebook can copy them and destroy them with a much better model that they didn't release, force them to sell, or kill them with the license.

Is it just me or is that title worded as confusingly as possible?

Yeah, those xAI bots aren't yet at the same level as ChatGPT

It's not "your choice" if you have to hack the installer to do it, something 99.99% of people wouldn't even understand if you tried to explain if to them.

Also a single command line does not compare to Linux

Outside of l33t h4kzors distros like Arch, Linux OS installers have not required any command line invocation for at least two decades. Just enter your username, wifi info, etc and click next until it's done.

I used to think like that, but now I'm on the fence since I've started working much more closely with packaging. Calling it "linux" is actually kind of harmful for adoption. Devs that claim their software works on Linux mislead people into thinking it works on any Linux distro, which is rarely true. Most of the time, those devs only test on Ubuntu and no other distro.

Maybe when Snaps finally die out and Flatpak emerges as the one true standard for desktop apps, then that problem will go away once and for all. Until then, I think we should normalize distinguishing Ubuntu, Fedora, Arch, etc as separate "operating systems" instead of "distros", which is an unnecessary and misleading term anyways.

Same, it has been years since I've watched any Star Trek but every now and then I'll dream about an episode or just randomly remember a scene or quote.

Maybe a rewatch is exactly what I need to restore my faith in humanity right now?

Why would the pedophile Matt Gaetz be offended by a song dissing pedophiles?

But also fuck this type of partisan rage bait article. This type of writing is what divides us, even if it's saying things you wanna hear.

I'm seeing people say that the broadcaster (Fox Sports, of course) injected cheers into the broadcast for Trump, and boos for Taylor Swift. I don't want to spread misinfo though so does anyone know if it's true, or if there's a way to validate it? (Eg by analyzing the audio)

EA should split itself up or sell off some franchises. The current situation makes nobody happy: investors don't like the profitability of single player games, players don't like the live serviceification of single player games, and I'm sure devs don't like that they can't work on projects that likely inspired them to become game devs in the first place.

The Sims franchise could support a medium sized studio on its own.

I played the Sims 1&2 as a kid, and love the fuck out of them. As an adult with disposable income, I would have gladly dropped even $100 on a proper modernized rerelease of these games I love. Instead, I saved my money and downloaded them for free. Because why the hell wouldn't I? The pirate versions are literally better. EA is squandering the potential of this and many other IPs

BaCk iN mY DaY wE SaVeD To FlOpPy DiSkS!!

etc