There is clearly an anti-China bias here. Show me comments demonstrating the same level of distrust against Google for open-sourcing projects like Tensorflow, Kubernetes, Flutter, Chromium, etc.
The chromium example is wild. There's an extreme distrust and contempt for chromium becoming the defacto browser and therefore Google becoming the defacto gatekeeper of the web.
I'll supply such a comment: Any software open sourced by any for-profit company, including Google, is a calculated move ultimately intended to increase their bottom line, and it's naive to think otherwise.
No, it is not. This is a common misconception that the large companies are very happy about.
1. The century-old Ford decision wasn't about this. It was about him refusing to pay dividends to shareholders he was feuding with. I.e. dominant shareholder using his control to starve minority shareholders of returns.
The court still let him keep spending huge sums on factories and price cuts that didn't clearly maximize profits.
2. Even if the case was about profit maximization (it wasn't), the judgment was a Michigan state decision. It doesn't have force outside of it.
3. US business law is in practice actually the opposite. A business can do pretty much whatever it wants. This is fundamental.
4. Even if it were illegal (it's not), anything can reasonably be framed as being in the long-term interest of the company, including donating to causes, raising employee wages and so on. Courts never question this.
Just imagine this was a thing. It's completely untenable for this reason. Who is a court to judge that something isn't in the longterm interest of shareholders unless it's literally spending all the company money on yachts for personal use?
5. No company has ever been prosecuted for this, obviously, because it's not a thing that exists. The closest you can get is that there's a potential duty to seek the best price if a company must be sold or broken up. But that's a very specific situation.
It's 100% a myth. Feel free to copy this and spread it when you see someone saying this.
Scroll the front page. Find literally any story that has to do with a major US tech company. Open the comment section. Look at the the top comment. It will be negative. Most of the other top comments as well. Trying to gaslight us into not believing our own eyes ..
"Drilling into the original article where Jarred explained the reasoning behind the change, It's pretty clear that under zig the team was doing things by hand that are automatic in rust."
* Claude Fable produced a counterexample to the Jacobian Conjecture
"This is a rare instance where feeding this groundbreaking information into an LLM gives _them_ psychosis. I fed this to claude code and watched it verify the result in 7 different ways to be 100% certain, and it was just flabbergasted. Quite remarkable."
* Ollama: All Aboard Open Models
"A year and still no implementation for such a basic need as offloading MoE layers onto the CPU selectively. On llama.cpp I can get models like Qwen 35BA3B running partially on gpu/cpu with 40t/s on a laptop thanks to --n-cpu-moe but on this VC funded joke it would be simply unusable. I can't quite understand how you make a wrapper so much worse than the code you're ripping out."
* OpenAI reduces Codex Model Context Size from 372k to 272k
"I know a lot of people like to say that compaction makes this moot, but the level of detail you lose across compaction is wildly too much for most things that I do, unfortunately."
* M-Chips: M7 with up to 1.5 TB – and why Apple is skipping the M6
"I hope they put a better connector than TB5 so we can cluster them properly at 1TB/S"
Looking at the top comment about Google right now. Big difference between "their products/processes suck" vs. "these people and their companies and government are an insidious evil".
Ah, the ol' gaslighting you into thinking you're gaslighting me trick.
I mean, I expect Google open-sourced those projects because they see economic benefit to themselves in doing so, not because they are good-hearted.
Chromium is an especially silly example to use: they benefit by controlling the web platform, and open-sourcing Chromium has allowed them to get their web engine into many other browsers.
> Show me comments demonstrating the same level of distrust against Google for open-sourcing projects like Tensorflow, Kubernetes, Flutter, Chromium, etc.
There's a search bar at the bottom of the page. Most people, including me, detest google and think of them as a thoroughly dishonest and sleazy organization. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to not boost China for a moment in order to accuse you of dishonest rhetoric.
It's almost insane that you've posted "comments demonstrating the same level of distrust against Google for open-sourcing [...] Chromium[...]" as if that's not a hobby for thousands of people (including me.)
edit: this has got to be a submarine shill account: 226 karma in 10 years. If this is true, pleas stop. China is doing a good enough job that they don't need it.
I always wonder who these weirdos are that look at commenters' past comments to try and deduce some fact and "win" their argument. More common on Reddit, but still exists here. Basement dweller-level weird either way.
"226 karma in 10 years." - What does that even mean to you? Should I be posting more? Does my behavior not align with your list accepted human behaviors for a non-Chinese?
The ridiculousness of your post shows how far the anti-China bias goes with you people.
> There's a search bar at the bottom of the page.
The dishonesty here is coming from you. You're assuming something exists. I'm saying show me. If it's so easy to find, wouldn't it be way easier to simply put this definitive proof in my face instead of this weird roundabout argument you're trying to make?
How legit is this? In my experience, every time I've updated iOS due to some urgent "security issue", the result was my phone just got a whole lot slower.
that's because it jits code instead of pre-jitting like android does, so when you hit a piece of code that hasn't been compiled yet you perceive it as slowdown since the first time it runs it is emulated.
then it makes no sense why apple warns you that your device is performing "background" activities post update, last time I looked at iOS binaries they seem to decompile as-if it was bytecode - but it could also be related to more advanced debug directories haven't messed with internals of these devices since breaking the bootloader became pretty much impossible.
I didn't realize these archive links were still working. Ever since the FBI order in November, these links have just been hanging for me. https://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/ had been saying it was down so I just thought it actually was down for everyone, but I continue to see these links posted. Is the site still working for some people?
The blocks tend to be implemented at the DNS level, so you can usually connect by using a different DNS server. The Tor onion link works fine as well, and that URL is on the archive.today Wikipedia page.
> Who is using K-means for classification? If you have labels, then a supervised algorithm seems like a more appropriate choice.
The generated data is labeled but we can imagine those labels don't exist when running k-means. There are many applications for unsupervised clustering. I don't, however, think that there are many applications for running much of anything on an Apple ][+.
> K-means clustering is a recursive algorithm
My bad. It's iterative. I'll fix that. Thanks.
> If we know that the distributions are Gaussian, which is very frequently the case in machine learning
Gaussian distributions are very frequent and important in machine learning because of the Central Limit Theorem but, beyond that, you are correct. While many natural phenomena are approximately normal, the reason for the Gaussian's frequent use is often mathematical mathematical convenience. I'll correct my post.
> we can employ a more powerful algorithm: Expectation Maximization (EM)
Excellent point. I will fix that, too. "While k-means is simple, it does not take advantage of our knowledge of the Gaussian nature of the data. If we know that the distributions are at least approximately Gaussian, which is frequently the case, we can employ a more powerful application of the Expectation Maximization (EM) framework (k-means is a specific implementation of centroid-based clustering that uses an iterative approach similar to EM with 'hard' clustering) that takes advantage of this." Thank you for pointing out all of this!
On the contrary, I'm confused about why you're confused.
This is a well-known and documented phenomenon - the paradox of choice.
I've been working in machine learning and AI for nearly 20 years and the number of options out there is overwhelming.
I've found many of the tools out there do some things I want, but not others, so even finding the model or platform that does exactly what I want or does it the best is a time-consuming process.
Not just lately. See /r/politics. Sometime in the last 5-7 years /r/science or /r/technology (or both, I forget because I stopped reading) basically became the science/tech versions of /r/politics.
This is interesting because it shows us how a programmer thinks of a problem vs. how a psychologist or neuroscientist would think of this problem and highlights the lack of "human-ness" in programmer thinking.
I'm no fan of schools forcing STEM students to study boring electives but this is a prime example of why that might be useful.
The entire premise of the post is wrong - average pixel value has nothing to do with how orange the oranges look - it's all about perception.
You saw someone making a bunch of observations, setting up an experiment and trying to use maths/programming to prove an hypothesis they believed to be a sign of "lack of human-ness"?
To me it showed curiosity and ingenuity, sure they might not have studied a certain subject but it is a totally valid approach to an unknown problem. It might actually get people who have similar "silly questions" to run a similar set of experiment and perhaps stumble upon something novel.
You comment showed less human-ness than OP, ironically.
While you are correct about color perception, I don't see the link to a 'lack of humanness in programmer thinking'. It's not an inherent trait to software engineers. The entire field of HCI, interaction design and everything around how we deal with digital colors are fully focused on the human experience.
Maybe a reminder that computer science != programming.
It's not a "programmer" problem. Any competent program I know would never thing of averaging the color of the orange with the color of the non-orabge bag, and expect that to be orange, or representative of how we percieve the orange.
I haven't installed this yet, but does it require camera access? i.e. does it "transform" your own image to the target image while maintaining facial expression, pose, etc.? Based on the animations, I'd assume it doesn't use the camera since there are techniques that can lipsync from audio.
