Viewing profile — zymhan

> Isn't this exactly the kind of discrimination against fields of endeavour that would make a slam-dunk case for any antitrust enforcement? No.

Definitely never seen it written as "Edgewood Georgia" before but I there really is only one. Okay two, Avenue and the shopping center.

Buddy, be real.

It is simply a benchmark. It is well known that benchmarks are not meant to apply to every possible task you might perform.

Slate already has that covered.

That's what the person you replied to is saying. You don't need this model.

Well tyvm, I found a new tweak for my transcoding pipeline :)

Once you add multiple machines reading and writing simultaneously, you'll hit a limit. But that's fine, build what you need now, no need to over-optimize.

>should be reported, discussed, dissected and critiqued early and often. And why does anonymity detract from any of that?

[flagged]

It will make it harder for "worthy" companies to get loans and credit.

Restricting knowledge is fundamentally different.

Yes it was. And probably still is.

> You'd be laughed at if you said that ChatGPT could help you with graduate level mathematics in 2024, but this year, AI models on simple prompts are solving previously unsolved Er…

It's a press release.

You are missing the forest for the trees.

They were not asking for your individual opinion. They were asking why any given person would need it.

Just consider the math there for a second, when you factor in the average US wage.

> There is no evidence yet in the labour-market data of AI destroying many jobs. Literally from the article https://www.economist.com/leaders/2026/05/14/prepare-for-an-...

Surely you're not referring to this prediction that was so bad, it's now a meme: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224

I was confused by the short commit history, and then I checked the branches. I love that someone went to this effort.

That is an unnecessary interrogation, you don't need to verify the initial call at all. Simply call your bank on your own.

The standard doesn't say that you must accept all URIs up to a certain length. You're allowed to decide, based on context, what is "too long". That is to say, you're allowed to hav…

I hate that I never considered this before.

It is most likely both: Intentional leaks of the truth. Obviously, _what_ someone chooses to leak can still benefit them, even if it's true. You can be selective about what informa…