Live data from Hacker News

First glimpse inside burnt scroll after 2k years

bbc.co.uk

71–80 of 95 posts

Re: First glimpse inside burnt scroll after 2k years

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> dismantling the welfare and regulatory state Pretty sure that's exactly what the US voted for in the last election, considering that was pretty explicitly promised. I think most of the US is cheering them on as they do it.

Why do MAGA conservatives cheer the over-turning of Chevron, dramatically limiting the executive branch's power to interpret law, while also simultaneously cheering Trump's initiative to seize Congress's power of the purse? What's the internal logic that rationalizes executive regulatory power being unconstitutional with a legal presidential power to unilaterally ignore Congress's funding allocations?

[deleted]

Re: First glimpse inside burnt scroll after 2k years

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is saying he isn’t intelligent? And can’t smart people do bad things?

What’s bad about finding waste? Many appropriations are expired yet still keep getting paid out. That’s crazy. The liberal media echo chamber is preventing people from using common sense. When media and congressional democrats literally call us “Nazis” — it’s hard to take any of it seriously. “Trump is a fascist” If that’s true, he’s the first fascist in history to attempt to make the government smaller. Apparently b…

The problem with it is that if you're claiming Musk gives a rat's ass about free speech, there are many, many examples that disprove it. He has literally banned people on X or taken away their checkmarks or added checkmarks to people because he didn't like what they had to say. He's not a free speech absolutist, he constantly censors people who say things he doesn't like.

In theory, DOGE isn't a bad idea, but you look at the implementation, and you look at the moves Musk has made to remove his enemies from their positions, and you look at the things they won't touch - their goals align more with making the billionaire class richer than anything relating to free speech or reducing waste. Musk lies constantly, with and without reason. I personally think he's so used to it, he can't help lying at this point.

Re: First glimpse inside burnt scroll after 2k years

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s bad about finding waste? Many appropriations are expired yet still keep getting paid out. That’s crazy. The liberal media echo chamber is preventing people from using common sense. When media and congressional democrats literally call us “Nazis” — it’s hard to take any of it seriously. “Trump is a fascist” If that’s true, he’s the first fascist in history to attempt to make the government smaller. Apparently b…

The problem with it is that if you're claiming Musk gives a rat's ass about free speech, there are many, many examples that disprove it. He has literally banned people on X or taken away their checkmarks or added checkmarks to people because he didn't like what they had to say. He's not a free speech absolutist, he constantly censors people who say things he doesn't like. In theory, DOGE isn't a bad idea, but you loo…

[flagged]

Re: First glimpse inside burnt scroll after 2k years

#75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is saying he isn’t intelligent? And can’t smart people do bad things?

What’s bad about finding waste? Many appropriations are expired yet still keep getting paid out. That’s crazy. The liberal media echo chamber is preventing people from using common sense. When media and congressional democrats literally call us “Nazis” — it’s hard to take any of it seriously. “Trump is a fascist” If that’s true, he’s the first fascist in history to attempt to make the government smaller. Apparently b…

People are upset partly because the new administration is taking the law into its own hands, and partly because it seems to be acting without any planning or research, and seems to be going about it recklessly and without concern for consequences.

Regarding USAID specifically, it was set up in the aftermath of the Foreign Assistance Act by John F. Kennedy, and as an agency it was later established as law by Congress. Trump cannot legally shut down USAID without another act of Congress, and he cannot legally redirect its funds, which have already been appropriated. The administration is well within their right to change how the funds are allocated, but so far the stated intention has been to shut off all foreign aid, not change what aid is provided.

The fact that Warren Christopher etc. wanted to get rid of USAID 27 years ago is irrelevant, since that plan was never adopted and did not call for shutting off foreign aid, so it's not comparable. It's just misdirection.

It's also difficult to take arguments for "government waste" seriously in the case of USAID. First, the agency has a tiny budget of around $50B (2023), 16x less than Medicare, or around 0.8% of the entire state budget. Secondly, it was explicitly set up to give away money. Waste is its raison d'etre! Reports show its admin overhead being around 7.7%, which is very low for an aid organization.

It's pretty clear that USAID isn't cut because of waste, but because the Trump administration wants to stop giving aid to poor foreign countries. However, they're not so inclined to say that out loud.

It's also a self-own because USAID is an important soft power tool. It's one of the ways the US can project a positive image on the world, something it has been very good at since the post-war period.

Re: First glimpse inside burnt scroll after 2k years

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> dismantling the welfare and regulatory state Pretty sure that's exactly what the US voted for in the last election, considering that was pretty explicitly promised. I think most of the US is cheering them on as they do it.

Why do MAGA conservatives cheer the over-turning of Chevron, dramatically limiting the executive branch's power to interpret law, while also simultaneously cheering Trump's initiative to seize Congress's power of the purse? What's the internal logic that rationalizes executive regulatory power being unconstitutional with a legal presidential power to unilaterally ignore Congress's funding allocations?

Most Americans, whether on the left or right, have no real idea how government works, what branch has what powers, and more importantly why.

They have no understanding of history, of how important such separation of power are.

In such context, it is easy to see the logic. They have no idea the relevance, only that their team likes the outcome.

Re: First glimpse inside burnt scroll after 2k years

#77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are things you disagree with bad by definition or assumption? Or because you were told… because unless you have a front row seat, everything you know is because someone else already parsed that info for you.

> unless you have a front row seat, everything you know is because someone else already parsed that info for you. Taking this to its logical conclusion, it is pointless for us to discuss anything we're not actively doing.

Interesting idea.

Perhaps you could also investigate the motivation of the people who tell you how to feel and what to think?

Along those lines… how many were receiving say, USAID themselves?

Re: First glimpse inside burnt scroll after 2k years

#78
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately the only leverage Congress has to stop Executive overreach is impeachment. If they refuse to impeach, then they are tacitly handing the Executive ever more power, essentially moving us from a republic to an elected dictatorship. And given that the GOP has a majority, no matter how slim, it seems very unlikely they will impeach.

The executive branch systematically dismantling itself doesn't sound like "ever more power".

If Congress already passed a law to regulate food so customers don't get poisoned.

And the president can say "I'm gonna ignore that and dismantle the agency Congress set up to do it"

What power does Congress have anymore?

Re: First glimpse inside burnt scroll after 2k years

#79
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Presumably, it's possible for errors to slip through, but human labelers can similarly make errors. That's often an argument for AI systems: Is it better than humans (than avoiding car accidents, reading text, reading x-rays, etc.). But in science we need observable evidence.

> But in science we need observable evidence. The observable evidence here is the raw x-ray data. Based on the article, what is being done here was using ML to process that X-ray data, to create another set of output that the humans could analyze. I understand jumping on the anti-AI bandwagon, but this ain't ChatGPT. Using ML to process complex instrument output has been used since at least the 70s. This is much clos…

> I understand jumping on the anti-AI bandwagon

Why be an asshole? What do you accomplish? I now have zero interest in what you have to say. I stopped there.

Re: First glimpse inside burnt scroll after 2k years

#80
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Presumably, it's possible for errors to slip through, but human labelers can similarly make errors. That's often an argument for AI systems: Is it better than humans (than avoiding car accidents, reading text, reading x-rays, etc.). But in science we need observable evidence.

We have plenty of observable evidence that the output of these detection models correponds to real ink residue, at least on one of the scrolls where the distinct texture is most obvious [0]. The models definitely aren't making things up out of pure noise. And if they did, then it almost certainly wouldn't come out as identifiable Greek letters, since these models are strictly looking at local patches of texture to id…

The question is, do the researchers use the ML/AI system to discover and identify likely text - which could be great - or do they use its output conclusively?

In fairness, the paper may answer that question but I don't have time now ...

Post reply on HN