And there don't seem to be much non-trivial code written under this project, it's just loosely putting together some existing work and adding some READMEs with the same format.
A bit disorienting for someone looking for statistical computing environment in CL, to say the least. Maybe I'm stupid but this is no where near what (a somewhat complete environment) it makes itself look like.
> Productivity has increased faster than wages have, and difference has gone to the already wealthy.
What/who has financed productivity increases? Isn’t it tools and infrastructure etc. for the most part, paid for by asset owners? There are likely exceptions, but big picture.
No, why would the finance team care for the cover of a movie or the available subtitles?
If everyone would have the same definition, changing some thing about a movie will need a change in every consumer who doesn't actually care.
No, because context and use defines the meaning. To the data team, a "Movie" might mean a file on disk. To the finance team, a "Movie" might mean a contract to a studio. To the Customer, a "Movie" is something they watch. That each of these contexts can use the term "Movie" does not actually mean they share anything in common. We could have called them "Files", "Contracts" and "Watchables" instead.
When people embark on 'universal' data definitions, conversations of the type "But is it reaaalllly a Movie??" are an endless source of confusion.
Alternatively, the process of defining these global definitions exposes exactly this conflict and leads to common definitions of "Files", "Contracts" and "Watchables" instead of 3 conflicting definitions of "Movies"?
The conflict will definitely help define the terms. Maybe they will all choose "Movie", maybe not. Just there is no universally ideal term that represents a concept for all users for all time. It's a common error to seek such universal definitions.
Exactly. In UDA, each Movie entity belongs to a specific business domain. Universality isn't an inherent truth, it's a social alignment within a group, useful only to the extent that it helps solve shared problems.
A unique identifier for a movie is the same thing, like an ISBN number. What the label means in each area is going to be different. That said, some things like "director", "budget" are immutable properties of a movie but are absolutely irrelevant for the business areas and the duplication of these properties in different domains is fundamentally not that big of a deal
"Speaking to reporters after he was released, the civilian identified himself as Marcos Leao, 27. Leao said he was an Army veteran on his way to an office of the Department of Veterans Affairs when he crossed a yellow tape boundary and was asked to stop."
> Sam Altman, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and others may have slightly different goals and ambitions in the near term, but their grand visions for the next decade and beyond are remarkably similar. Framed less as technological objectives and more as existential imperatives, they include aligning AI with the interests of humanity;
If we view AI/AGI/ASI as a child of humans, then they're going to learn some pretty bad behaviors from us. They are more likely to mimic what we do than to do what we tell them to do.
> The Silurian Hypothesis asks whether signs of truly ancient past civilizations would even be recognisable today.
A hypothesis is a tentative explanation for an observation or phenomenon that is based on prior knowledge and can be tested by gathering and analyzing data.
Given that, is there something that we're unable to explain properly without invoking the Silurian Hypothesis? Asked another way: what does this hypothesis help with that is otherwise hard to explain?
It helps by providing some context to how we think about detecting alien life, for one thing. The big question in that field is the Fermi paradox: If there is a high likelihood of extra-terrestrial life, why haven't we detected any signs of it yet? Understanding the evolution, characteristics, and lifespan of the only instance we know of could explain the paradox.
The Sahara desert is carpeted with stone tools made by prehumans. Those tools are still going to exist a billion years from now. There are mines and tunnels that will still be detectable. If someone made stone tools a billion years ago, we would be finding them now.
Not new visually, yeah. Aero and Glassmorphism walked so this could run.
What Apple’s doing here feels deeper. It’s not just a style layer, it’s starting to drive how the UI behaves. Motion, depth, and light are all working together to create more emotion in the interface.
Could be overkill, could be the start of something bigger. Time will tell.
Seems to be this company in Singapore: https://opencorporates.com/companies/sg/201923570D
As opposed to the Symbolics company: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolics
reply