> it’s not cosplay; it’s rigorous historical reconstruction
...
Taking it at face value, this is more theatre than science for a few reasons:
- twins don't magically mean two identical bodies
- food intake has a much greater effect from thermogenesis than most laymen realize; I don't see that the two men consumed the same diet at the same meal times each day, nor does the article mention what they ate at all?
- no control for their own body quirks, they should swap gear every so often
- the focus seems to be on warmth and moisture management, but in a weird way. Was the historical gear twin actually cold on summit day, or are we just assuming warmer=better? Warmth alone is useless. In my circles, good gear performs well at the intersection of performance(warmth per weight for insulation, as high moisture vapor transmission rate with as low cubic feet per minute airflow per weight for windshells, ability to shed external moisture while avoiding internal moisture buildup per weight for outer weather layers, breathability and speed of drying per weight for base layers) crossed with durability and your price point.
>Modern gear allows for a “set and forget” mentality
No the heck it doesn't!!! Every climber, long distance backpacker, and mountaineer reading this article surely got hit with a blast of Gell-Mann Amnesia just like I did. Layering for active and static usage and frequent adjustments to clothing/gear according to changes in body temperature and weather are still very much part of the game!
If you're comparing the pinnacle of gear tech 100 years ago to today, you can't compare to generic off the shelf Patagonia and Arcteryx clothing. A more apt comparison would be a modern ultralight kit with bespoke gear made by cottage companies like Timmermade.
I posit the primary function of modern gear is not that it performs better as a rule, rather it weighs less while performing the same or better. Other commenters have minimized the weight savings of 2kg with modern gear. As someone who regularly backpacks in winter conditions, I must say 2 kilos is a LOT of weight to shrug your shoulders at. It's over two full days of food at 4,000 calories per day. It's more than my snowshoes and spikes weigh combined!
I think this may sound smart and counterfactual to common knowledge as a layman, but to anyone who regularly goes outdoors in extreme conditions, this article and experiment is horseshit.
> I think this may sound smart and counterfactual to common knowledge as a layman, but to anyone who regularly goes outdoors in extreme conditions, this article and experiment is horseshit.
So it's okay when big American corps raid the internet ignoring any terms of service or licenses they see in order to train models they rent back to us, but when a foreign entity trains off of Anthropic it's illegal?
The fact that they're calling it an "attack" implies otherwise.
I find the entire premise of this announcement absurd. Fraudulent accounts? They're just accounts. They paid for the access the same as any other. They're accessing Claude just like a human (or *claw) would.
There's no argument against their strategy that doesn't make them complete hypocrites in respect to how they got the model training data in the first place.
> them complete hypocrites in respect to how they got the model training data in the first place.
sure, hypocrisies is part of rules for big games: politics and business.
> Fraudulent accounts? They're just accounts.
they tell the story in blog post, that they don't allow claude in China, but those labs use some proxy services to access claude and mix traffic with regular users to hids its activities
If anything, this makes them more legit than Anthropic because they are paying for the content, whereas Anthropic just stole *all* the data they got a hold of. So, in this case the Chinese AI labs stand on higher moral ground LOL.
I did it. I grow organic market/CSA produce and provide opportunities for special needs individuals on the farm. I go to bed dog-tired, I make a fraction of what I would in software dev these days, but every single day is rewarding, and my resting heart rate is in the high 40s/low 50s without going to the gym. No jira tickets, no sleepless nights slamming caffeine during a sprint, no out of touch execs forcing me to enshittify, no more eye drops for excessive screen usage. I grow delicious food, support a wholesome local community, and feel like I'm making a positive contribution to society instead of pumping out CRUD apps and gamified bullshit like I was in tech.
I agree that farming is definitely romanticized in some tech circles, and it is not for everyone. Of course my tech experience wasn't universal, but even if ZIRP free money comes back to tech, I'll still be here tending my field :)
Until reading this thread I never knew so many in the industry were against performant software and workflows, but I suppose that explains the state of things.
Oh My Zsh is more sluggish than benching zsh -ic 'exit 0' would suggest. This benchmark will show command lag among other things, which is very noticeable on a slower computer. https://github.com/romkatv/zsh-bench
I use https://github.com/romkatv/zsh4humans. I installed it once, took an hour or two to tweak it to my liking, and haven't touched it since. It's in maintenance mode so I'm not worried about my zshrc breaking randomly. I have transient git prompt, autosuggestions, autocomplete, syntax highlighting, vim mode, a whole bunch of added functions and line editor additions, and my terminal opens in one frame. It feels more like an extension of my mind than a tool I'm interacting with. OMZ by comparison, feels like typing over a slow ssh connection.
I use a Fenix 7x pro solar and it's one of my favorite pieces of hardware right now. I dread having yet another item to charge and keep track of, but this thing lasts a full month if I'm not actively tracking workouts. My only complaint is it's not hackable like a pebble, but honestly I'm not sure what functionality I'd add to it, other than Doom for lols. I really just use it to tell the time, see phone notifications as they arrive, altitude/baro/compass when outdoorsing, and for heart rate tracking. Works great with Gadgetbridge, handles the abuse of my physical job, and doesn't get in my way like other smart watches I've tried, where I had to remember to charge it every other day or I couldn't track my sleep. This watch lives on my wrist and tells me days in advance when it needs a charge!
I backpack often (usually 8-13% bodyweight in my pack) and during long summer days I can comfortably push well into the 30 mile per day range if there isn't too much vert to slow my pace down. My feet get sore, brain gets tired, and I run out of daylight well before any sort of muscle failure in my legs. If you aren't used to walking from sunrise to sunset doing so would build muscle, but your time would be better spent on a progressive overload leg routine in a gym.
Yup, I have never gone that far (but my summer hiking is entirely at high elevation with lots of climb) but I have never found anything like a failure point--I wear out because of time (not even daylight--I've made navigation errors that left me out there well past sunset), not muscle failure.
I use this on my 42-key Corne: https://mark.stosberg.com/markstos-corne-3x5-1-keyboard-layo...
It's a sensible starting layout that I've made very few changes to. I added a mousekeys/macro layer, moved single quote to put semicolon on pinky, added print screen bind, and added a homerow combo J+K for esc.
...
Taking it at face value, this is more theatre than science for a few reasons:
- twins don't magically mean two identical bodies
- food intake has a much greater effect from thermogenesis than most laymen realize; I don't see that the two men consumed the same diet at the same meal times each day, nor does the article mention what they ate at all?
- no control for their own body quirks, they should swap gear every so often
- the focus seems to be on warmth and moisture management, but in a weird way. Was the historical gear twin actually cold on summit day, or are we just assuming warmer=better? Warmth alone is useless. In my circles, good gear performs well at the intersection of performance(warmth per weight for insulation, as high moisture vapor transmission rate with as low cubic feet per minute airflow per weight for windshells, ability to shed external moisture while avoiding internal moisture buildup per weight for outer weather layers, breathability and speed of drying per weight for base layers) crossed with durability and your price point.
>Modern gear allows for a “set and forget” mentality
No the heck it doesn't!!! Every climber, long distance backpacker, and mountaineer reading this article surely got hit with a blast of Gell-Mann Amnesia just like I did. Layering for active and static usage and frequent adjustments to clothing/gear according to changes in body temperature and weather are still very much part of the game!
If you're comparing the pinnacle of gear tech 100 years ago to today, you can't compare to generic off the shelf Patagonia and Arcteryx clothing. A more apt comparison would be a modern ultralight kit with bespoke gear made by cottage companies like Timmermade.
I posit the primary function of modern gear is not that it performs better as a rule, rather it weighs less while performing the same or better. Other commenters have minimized the weight savings of 2kg with modern gear. As someone who regularly backpacks in winter conditions, I must say 2 kilos is a LOT of weight to shrug your shoulders at. It's over two full days of food at 4,000 calories per day. It's more than my snowshoes and spikes weigh combined!
I think this may sound smart and counterfactual to common knowledge as a layman, but to anyone who regularly goes outdoors in extreme conditions, this article and experiment is horseshit.