They don’t, but with quantization and distillation, as well as fancy use of fast ssd storage (they published a paper on this exact topic last year), you can get a really decent model to work on device. People are already doing this with things like OpenHermes and Mistral (given, 7B models, but I could easily see Apple doubling ram and optimizing models with the research paper I mentioned above, and getting 40B models running entirely locally). If the start of the network is good, a 40B model could take care of a vast majority of user Siri queries without ever reaching out to the server.

For what it’s worth, according to their wwdc note, they’re basically trying to do this.

Not even a summary of what’s on Wikipedia, usually a summary of the top 5 SEO crap webpages for any given query.

Depends. If they get access to the code OpenAI is using, they could absolutely try to leapfrog them. They could also just be looking at ways to get near ChatGPT4 performance locally, on an iPhone. They’d need a lot of tricks, but succeeding there would be a pretty big win for Apple.

I dunno if you live in the US, but if you do, you’re already required to pay taxes on the goods you exchange. So literally nothing would change wrt this cashless society thing because the law is already there, and you’re already not paying your taxes, and it has nothing to do with cash because in a barter you’re not exchanging cash.

What would you do if (insert hypothetical)? Oh okay. Well what would you do (insert more far fetched hypothetical).

Repeat.

But fine I’ll bite the bait. You can’t de facto bar bartering, as a significant amount if b2b is effectively bartering. Now if only corpos can do it, then I’d say we should really look into that socialist democracy stuff.

I think I’ve tried this before but will give it another shot, maybe I just got the regular one.

I wonder too if there are genetic differences at play. Like folks that taste cilantro differently.

Anyways if it’s 90% as good as milk then that’ll be good enough for me to switch haha, thanks!

Please give me recommendations of oat milk that tastes good. I’ve been desperately looking and/or hoping for bacterial production to kick off to make it more environmentally sustainable, but I haven’t found anything that tastes remotely as good (on its own or in a latte). I drink ultrafiltered milk for what it’s worth, usually 2% so I don’t need the creamy aspect, I just like the flavor.

Maybe, but it would be cool to find out, wouldn’t it? Can’t be worse than right now in Texas haha, so we might as well go blue.

Absolutely. But if we can flip Texas from right and alt right to centrist then we may actually get progressive candidates in other areas (and frankly, if we flip Texas blue we will see a shift in policies from republicans to the left). And, perhaps by some miracle, we can get star or ranked choice voting, but that absolutely won’t happen while republicans are in control here.

Here’s to a better Texas (lifts shiner [but prefers one of the many smaller microbrews here])

That wasn’t my immediate assumption. That was a conclusion drawn after you repeatedly stated that democrats were moving right and basically did nothing good. Which is fine, and I probably shouldn’t have assumed how you would vote, though given the environment these days it wasn’t too audacious of an assumption.

By all means critique. But also please vote for the furthest left candidate that can win in every election you can vote in. Especially in Texas. This place needs so much damn help, and the Republican leadership definitely isn’t going to help (unless you’re ridiculously wealthy or own a large company). And get others to vote as well, because the only thing that will change Texas is to change the elected officials in charge.

I can post articles as well.

https://apnews.com/article/biden-public-lands-conservation-leases-40b5f47203bbe92a1186a1a4e9e0ea5d

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_policy_of_the_Donald_Trump_administration#:~:text=The administration repealed the Clean,and proposed reversals of environmental

Note that repeals of policies means someone had to have passed it originally. Guess who passed net neutrality originally? Guess who passed the clean water rule? Guess who passed affordable care act? Oh, it seems democrats actually do move us left.

I also live in Texas, a state controlled by Republican interests for the past 20 years. Let’s look instead at locations where a state flipped blue. Just by one example, Michigan then passed a statewide constitutional amendment protecting abortion. You may be upset that we have to get statewide protections passed, but we only have to do that because Republican judges went against some 50 odd years of precedent to force it. So democrats are actually enshrining the very thing that Republicans took away.

Look, you can troll all day and pretend that Democrats are just as bad as republicans, but that’s absolutely wrong on so many issues, and frankly I’m going to exercise my right to vote for the party that will protect the things I want protected and move us further left.

Like logically, you should vote for the furthest left candidate that can actually win the election at every level. Anything less than that and you’re contributing to moving the country to the right. Reap what you sow and what not…

That’s not true at all. Biden specifically has protected more public spaces and land, while Trump specifically attempted to lease / sell / make available more of it to corporate interests. Net neutrality is being restored after it was rolled back under Ajit Pai. We can be frustrated democrats don’t do enough, or aren’t further left, but to say they keep the status quo at the regressive place republicans want to take us is demonstrably wrong. So while maybe they won’t expand affordable care beyond where it currently is, they’ll at least keep it where it is and restore it if possible. If they won’t add new parks, they at least protect the ones we have and cancel corporate interest on existing ones. If they won’t raise the taxes heavily on the rich (which is where I think they’re most guilty of “status quo”), they at least won’t give them trillions in tax breaks like Trump did.

It doesn’t lead us to the same place but slower, at least not everywhere. One party has rolled back abortion protections, equal rights protections, bans books, and a host of other regressive policies. Democrats didn’t do that. Democrats might keep status quo, but the Republican agenda is literally to move us backwards to a worse place (though if they wanna move us back to when the highest marginal tax rate was 90% I could be onboard with that part at least).

Yeah, I think in general people come up with veiled reasons for lower taxes but fundamentally it’s just because they don’t want to pay taxes at all.

I like taxes. I like having roads (though I want more public transportation), I like having firefighters and public parks and protected green spaces and…

Well they’d argue that the money they put in is taxed, presumably because it was income and subject to income tax. So any income used to assess tax, they’d argue is taxed.

I’d just argue any income (including from capital gains) should be taxed according to your wealth. I don’t care if it has already been assessed for tax. If it’s income, and you already have excessive wealth, you should be paying a hefty tax. The point of taxes is redistribution of wealth and communal improvement (eg infrastructure) so I really don’t care if something is taxed once twice or more times, I care that wealth is taxed and used for public good.

So the real / original answer to this was the idea that we should avoid double taxation. If you were taxed on income already, and then invested that income which is now post tax, that capital gains then should be less taxed (or some argue not taxed) because you already paid taxes on it.

I’m of the opinion that I think taxes should be based on any income you make, based on the wealth you have. Source of income for the wealthiest should be irrelevant (and yes this includes in my mind realizing gains from stocks by borrowing against them).

Almost. If you own a share of a company, you own a share of something fungible, namely literal company property or IP. Even if the company went bankrupt, you own a sliver of their real product (real estate, computers, patented processes). So while you may be speculating on the wealth associated with the company, it is not a scam in the sense that it isn’t a non fungible entity. The sole value of crypto currency is in its speculative value, it is not tied in theory or in practice to something of perceptibly equal realized value. A dividend is just giving you return on profit made from realized assets (aforementioned real estate or other company property or processes), but the stock itself is intrinsically tied to the literal ownership of those profit generating assets.

Except, you know, the stock being tied to ownership in a company that sells real goods or services. Definitely problems with how stocks are traded, but they’re quite different from crypto.

This so much. People need to recondition that entertainment is not news, and news should not be entertainment. News should be description of noteworthy (even if boring) factual events. A presumptive presidential candidate talking about violating the constitution of the United States, that is noteworthy; maybe not unexpected in this case, but noteworthy.

We need to be less entertained by news and more informed by news. Tell me what presidential candidates are saying in the most mundane terms possible. Anything beyond the barest oblique (as opposed to direct) fact or factual description should be eschewed.

Reading the article I’m not sure why I should t use ZFS on a boot drive. The author does, and was able to set up a nice incremental (encrypted) backup solution that was able to get them back up and running relatively quickly.

Only thing I can think is the manual nature of it maybe? I don’t see how btrfs would be better here based on the article unless I missed something perhaps?