Yes, but the examples where it's good has a name "insurance". It exists, it's generally well regulated, and is not easily exploited.
The reason it works better is because in a prediction market, the person betting against you has no resources or ability to go after you for fraudulent behavior. Whereas an insurance company has both.
No, they won. Piracy stayed at a microscopic level rather than becoming the usual way people got things. It stagnated, and maybe shrank. That's why they don't want to go into the piracy stopping business, it's a waste of time and money for them when they could be going after and negotiating with AI.
All TOS essentially boil down to "we owe you nothing and can change the product at anytime to anything we want at our sole discretion"
Obviously it would be unreasonable to accept such terms without further context. The further context in this case being that Anthropic will maintain Claude as an AI agent and seek to improve it's performance. What is at the heart of this issue is whether or not Anthropics recent A/B testing violated that context. Not whether or not they violated the TOS (they didn't, obviously)
While not being particularly knowledgeable in such things, I would presume the shrews.
A whales muscle needs to optimise for efficiency and oxygen storage to allow for extended deep dives and continuous use. Compared to a shrew whose muscles would favour compact size, low mass, and fast reactions to permit quick getaways.
My interpretation is that they built a simple virtual machine directly into the weights, then compiled a WASM runtime for that machine, then compiled the solver to that runtime.
> Which I would find "cute" if the database contained an equal amount of reason. I am perennially irritated that "US/Pacific" which is an _official_ name of a time zone _as used_ by the relevant time keeping authority, is called "backwards."
This assumes that every point on earth has exactly 1 governing body and that a significant majority of the people agree on who that governing body is and that the governing body gives a rats ass about what time it is. Or that everyone in a region agrees on what time it is. Or that ccTLDs are sufficient to unambiguously cover the entire earths surface.
The time zone database isnt just a record of "official" decisions regarding time, it is a record of what time a population thinks it is. There are geographic overlaps, cultural overlaps, pants on head stupid overlaps. It exists to try and translate between somebody somewhere some when giving a time and date reference to any point in history to whatever time system the user may choose to believe in.
Your solution is insufficiently complex to solve a problem of this complexity.
> Or that everyone in a region agrees on what time it is.
And how does the existence of the tzdb solve this problem in any way?
> Or that ccTLDs are sufficient to unambiguously cover the entire earths surface.
The user can still pick whatever they want. Just as they can now. The user can resolve ambiguity for themselves. Unless the tzdb decides unilaterally that their politically organized name for their timezone is somehow "wrong" and must be moved to the "backwards" file to be removed entirely. In which case they must accept whatever ambiguity the tzdb has created for them. "US/Pacific" is unambiguous. "America/Los_Angeles" is not.
> Your solution is insufficiently complex to solve a problem of this complexity.
You need to solve one problem. Publishing official tz information. If you have extended needs, then by all means, it's a computer, do whatever you like, but for the overwhelming majority of the population of earth, they need one function.
"What time does my government think it is because that time controls when things open, when I'm late for work, and when official paperwork has to be filed."
If you want a "whimsical" database that correctly gets timezones right for certain Japanese islands during the war, then you have that, but honestly, what general use case is there for this?
well, if they weren't doing something that would've otherwise been deemed illegal, then why would they consider it self-incriminating to have to follow KYC/AML rules?
You sound like a helpful world citizen. The other problem the US has is that it is illegal for a US Citizen to pay a bribe but there's no realistic enforcement. Luckily you can help solve this. Whenever and wherever you travel you can keep
some forms with you and every time you are pulled over you can fill them out with the police in quadruplicate so that each of you can mail them to Washington. At some later point the US can try to cross reference and determine who didn't mail theirs and then whether anyone was actually under US jurisdiction during the incident.
The right to a fair trial fundamentally requires the government to do 100% of the job of proving you guilty, and it shouldn’t force you to generate evidence against yourself while going about perfectly legal things
Yes! Nixpkgs straddles both worlds, like a system package manager it provides a way to install packages and their dependencies. However, like most language package managers it also imposes a locking mechanism so that every input into the nix expression* is locked to a hash, the mechanism is recursive and handles multiple versions of the same package in parallel.
The recent(ish) concept of "nix flakes" means there are 2 related but different mechanisms for achieving this but the end result is the same.
* In the land of NixOS everything is a nix expression including the system packages, configuration files, install image. It's all locked to hashes of upstream sources and is in theory, fully byte-identical reproducible.
The reason it works better is because in a prediction market, the person betting against you has no resources or ability to go after you for fraudulent behavior. Whereas an insurance company has both.
reply