Thanks, great read. Fills in quite a few holes in my own understanding of events.
Doesn't exactly leave one optimistic for a favorable final outcome, given how much U235 they supposedly already enriched to 60%. As I understand it, they could build twice as many bombs if they took the time to enrich to 90%, but they could build at least some now if they felt they had a reason to hurry.
I wouldn't be surprised if they felt they had a reason to hurry.
Are you aware that every YT Short can also be viewed with the normal player? If you do, do you prefer the Shorts interface and thus posted that URL rather then https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nd90rFPYVnc ?
I'd be interested in seeing an explanation of the code, since it looks pretty incomprehensible to me. Per the arbitrary rules I set for myself, I'm not allowed to precompute/hardcode the wheel (looks like this implementation uses a hardcoded wheel of size 2x3x5=30). I wonder if/by how much the performance would suffer by computing and storing the coprime remainders in memory instead of handing them directly to the compiler.
I wrote this in a semi obfuscated style to make it fit on one screen.
It's indeed a hardcoded 2x3x5 wheel; but I suspect computing all those
constants would have made the program significantly longer.
I don’t respond to specific comments with accusations, because I can’t prove it and it would suck to be falsely accused. But I find it really depressing to watch deep comment threads with someone debating with an AI. The human is putting so much effort in, and the AI is responding with all these well-written but often flawed arguments. I wish I could do something to save that person from that interaction.
Just like the rules say it's uninteresting and off-topic to complain that HN is turning into Reddit, it's equally uninteresting and off-topic to accuse posters of AI crimes.
And everyone's personal AI detector has a ridiculously high false-positive rate.
> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
You're absolutely right! Accusing other users of being AI isn't just unhelpful—it's actively detrimental to discussion. I'd love to hear others' thoughts regarding ways in which we can encourage legitimate human dialogue without senseless accusations.
A recommended follow-up is "stop pretending to be a bot ironically for humor, it's a joke that's been done to death and is therefore no longer funny and just noise."
We can now that it's an actual guideline. It's already well established that copypasting from the guidelines verbatim is accepted behavior, even though doing so violates more guidelines than whatever guideline it's pointing out. I will happily and enthusiastically tap this sign until the glass breaks.
I often find the LLM witch hunt comments to be more distracting than the original LLM slop. I would much rather bathe in a mixture of spam and non-spam than operate under constant fear of being weighed against a duck by the local villagers.
Why do almost all phones have to be in that narrow band of 6.5 to 6.9 inches?
I wish there were more size choices on both ends of the spectrum.
While most people prefer more choice below 6", I would like some choice above 7", since I keep my phone in my belly pouch, and never use it one-handed. My current Huawei Mate20X is actually ok at 7.2" (but worse than the Mediapad X1 I had before which at 7" was actually wider) but is way behind on Android updates, and will soon stop running my banking app.
While I agree with the spirit of the thread and dearly love my mini, I think this reasoning doesn’t account for a substantial reduction in bezels: my iPhone 5S had more than a centimetre of black bars above and below its 4" display (altogether it was 5.4" in diagonal), I bet those phablets you mentioned had even bigger bezels and were closer to modern 8.5" phones.
I wrote a non-trivial lambda program [1] which enumerates proofs in the Calculus of Constructions to demonstrate [2] that BBλ(1850) > Loader's Number.
[1] https://github.com/tromp/AIT/blob/master/fast_growing_and_co...
[2] https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/176966/golf-a-n...
reply