> it's socially acceptable to do 'yet another translation', but not a newer version in the same language
I wish they'd teach with modern English translations of Shakespeare in high schools. Maybe then kids would like it a lot more. But it seems like it's taboo to read Shakespeare in anything but the original.
They do. One series often used is "No Fear Shakespeare". Facing-page "translation", relatively cheap.
It's much better to watch it performed, though. The context the actors provide gets one past much of the difficulty with vocabulary or what have you. But yeah they do insist on reading them in school.
> But it seems like it's taboo to read Shakespeare in anything but the original.
You're definitely losing most of the sublimity in his actual words, if you don't read the original. Especially if the "translation" is into English at e.g. a 9th-grade reading level.
In the case of Shakespeare in particular (and also certain archaic translations of the Bible, notably the King James) modernizing/simplifying it may alter the language enough that the reader may not recognize unacknowledged (because of course your reader will know their Shakespeare) quotes from his works in other works, which quotes are everywhere even in things like modern popular cinema or TV. A big part of why you read Shakespeare to begin with is that his influence is so extensive that you practically have to, or you'll be missing one of a very-few not just helpful, but nigh-necessary, keys to understanding the rest of English literature (broadly, to include things like movies and video games and TV and so on)
> allocating a large part of my portfolio into AI companies
Even if you were certain that AI would take over virtually everything, the problem is deciding which AI companies to invest in. Thinking back to 1996, just when this new thing called "the web" was gaining tracking and assuming you were certain it was going to be huge, what companies would be the best investment? A lot of the companies doing web stuff went nowhere. Many of the biggest successes didn't even exist in 1996. It's not obvious which (if any) AI companies are worth investing in even if you're positive that AI is the future; the current companies might be massively overvalued; the best AI companies might not even exist yet.
How did ingve get to #3 with just 2 thousand words, whereas tptacek and jacquesm authored 3-4 million words? Looking at his 14-year history, it's true that he hasn't written that much. I suppose one possibility is that his writing is 1000x better at earning karma. But I'm going to hazard a guess that it's the quality of his 3-4 submissions per day that brings up his karma when one of his submissions is a hit (I think that submissions do count toward karma).
I think many folks get a majority of their karma from submissions (you can get a lot from popular stories). I believe that some people are quite good at anticipating which submissions will be productive (which is also something that LLMs should do well).
Most of mine is from comments. I’m too lazy to spend time, curating submissions.
As someone who hasn't used Windows in a long time, could you explain the benefit of doing a double install like that? I.e., if you stopped at step #1, it's activated, so what purpose does step 2 serve?
> $600 in the 1920s (1930s?), not inflation adjusted
I consulted the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator:
$600 in 1925 would be $11,264 today
$600 in 1935 would be $14,329 today
A lot of money, but I've heard that it can easily cost $10-20K today to erect a couple of poles to bring power a hundred feet to your property in a rural area these days. Do you know what distance was being covered to bring power to your grandfather?
> With widespread AI adoption we plausibly could consume 10x or more of the service: Legal services, for example, plausibly fit this bill.
A ten-fold productivity gain in legal services sounds simply awful for society. Imagine the time and money sink if everyone can sue you for every frivolous thing because AI can prepare and file the paperwork instantly without needing a lawyer. You'll need your own AI to defend against the onslaught of legal disputes.
Every contract for jobs and every terms & conditions for services will be 10x longer because AI has a much higher complexity threshold compared to a human. My belief is that one reason tax returns became much more complicated in the last ~30 years is because of tax preparation software. In the era of paper tax returns, there was a limit to the complexity that an individual or even an accountant could handle, so there was a limit on how complicated the government could make it.
Most normal people rarely need a lawyer in their lives. With AI's productivity explosion in the legal services, you're going to need legal services every day. Your neighbor wants to borrow your chainsaw? Your AI legal agent will negotiate a liability waiver with his AI agent.
There are a lot of fields where efficiency gains tend to be illusory. No one expects some new innovation in marketing to cause spending to plummet because of the efficiency gains. People have been genuinely innovating in marketing for a long while, and it's never happened. If anything, it seems to inspire more spending.
Id blame the complexity of tax returns more on lobbying. Everyone wants their own industry custom exemption and that in turn creates holes that need to be patched etc
I went to China in 2019, and they scanned my iris... yeah...
At an airport, there was a sign that said "Stand in front of the camera and we'll tell you the way to your gate.". It scanned my face, and on the screen it showed me my name (I guess to make sure it's the correct person), my gate, and how to walk there. I never consented to this commercial use...
That's almost certainly available in a public database in China, FYI. I got to speak at a cool event in Shenzhen in 2019 and the gates automatically face (and maybe iris?) recognized for entry -- I never 'got scanned' consciously, but they worked great first try.
As far as I know, face-recognition tech is illegal in law-abiding countries.
Although it's probably mostly a legal impediment, I can imagine if the authorities spotted an event and need to track a suspect, they can put all the footage into a system and it will return a sequence of videos/angles in which the suspect was seen.
Why don't early investors put clauses in their investment to protect themselves against being screwed over by later investors? It seems like an obvious thing to ask for if you're giving someone a lot of money, so I'm assuming there must be a very good reason it's not done.
Early investors (the main ones at least) usually get pro-rate rights - which means you can invest in later rounds to maintain your ownership percentage (i.e a later round dilutes your ownership, so you invest a bit until the ownership stays the same).
But the pref stack always favors later investors, partly because that's just the way it's always been, and if you try to change that now no one will take your money, and later investors will not want to invest in a company unless they get the senior liquidity pref.
It's isn't the default because the countermeasures cause a lot of side-effects. If it were on by default, new users would probably think the browser is broken or buggy.
Here's what the settings do and what sort of side-effects you might experience:
- Timezone is set to UTC which means any web calendar input becomes confusing at best
- Canvases turn into random stripes, which leaves artefacts all over many websites
- Some websites outright block you as bots (twitch does this)
- Some web APIs break, which can be a pain if you're web apps that rely on them
You can add websites to a whitelist to avoid the downsides on some sites (privacy.resistFingerprinting.exemptedDomains) but it's a pain to do that for every website.
other downsides, cloudflare, PayPal and all kinds of finance related sites will assign high threat level for you and you will make your life miserable for causes ranging from captcha through rejecting your purchases to even blocking you access.
and the worst part is that this didn't changed the fingerprint generated by mentioned here site just increases suspect level to 9
I haven't encountered too many problems with Cloudflare yet. Having a dedicated (rather than CGNAT), non-rotating IPv4 address and IPv6 subnet to access the internet probably helps.
resistFingerprinting does seem to work against fingerprint.com in my experiments after clearing its website data and a browser restart.
In my case it stayed the same, but I tested it on android Firefox, maybe it works better on desktop, but I do not have access to it right now to verify
You probably need to quit/force close and reopen. At the very least it randomizes your canvas results and timezone, which should mess with most fingerprinting sites.
It's actually part of the privacy preferences in the normal settings, and they supply this warning
> This setting may cause some websites to not display content or work correctly. If a site seems broken, you may want to turn off tracking protection for that site to load all content.
Some sites use light fingerprinting to provide features
Some websites prefilled username to allow quicker re-login - this kind of features. Worst case scenario, you will get a first-time visit experience all over again
That one at least is easy to fix, since firefox shows a little icon in url bar if it is blocking canvas data, and the remote site asked for it. You just click on it to whitelist that site.
I've had more issues personally with resist fingerprinting making major sites completely unusable (drupal.com, walmart.com..)
I wish they'd teach with modern English translations of Shakespeare in high schools. Maybe then kids would like it a lot more. But it seems like it's taboo to read Shakespeare in anything but the original.