Rephrasing the argument made in the post, math was like a "take a book, leave a book" exchange where you solved a problem, and in the process you discover more problems so the pool of interesting open problems is renewed. What OpenAI and the other labs are doing is akin to
- taking all the books in the exchange (which is technically allowed)
- destructively scanning them (still technically allowed)
- and not leaving any new books in their place (which is frowned upon, but there's no rule that says you have to replace books you take)
Rephrasing the argument made in the post, math was like a "take a book, leave a book" exchange where you solved a problem, and in the process you discover more problems so the pool of interesting open problems is renewed. What OpenAI and the other labs are doing is akin to
- taking all the books in the exchange (which is technically allowed, no rules about how many books you can take)
- destructively scanning them (still technically allowed, no rules about what you do with the book)
- and not leaving any new books in their place (which is frowned upon, but there's no rule that says you have to replace books you take)
The US pays much more for drugs than any other country. I guess one possibility is that no one has any leverage and big pharma is able to charge Americans more because they're richer. But the more popular theory is that countries can negotiate better prices than individuals can (yes, technically insurance companies can negotiate prices, but they seem unmotivated to drive any costs down). It seems the previous administration thought the government can negotiate lower prices: https://www.cms.gov/inflation-reduction-act-and-medicare/med....
I always wondered why almost all the kids bikes sold in Canada have coaster brakes. I actually thought all kids bikes had coaster brakes until I saw some at Decathlon with hand brakes (turns out it's a French company).
The ones in decathlon are great because they have levers designed for smaller hands. We went with rascal bikes, they are expensive but extremely light weight and no coaster brakes, they also have belts so no lubing and no clunky chain guards. I think the idea behind coaster brakes is that kids have weak hands and that it's easier for their brain to only think about what their legs are doing, pedal forwards to go, kick back to break. I know I had them as a kid back in the late 80s and it was fine, even cool. My recent experience with my own kid was opposite to that. We started on a second-hand Specialized Jett 16 with a rear coaster brake (before I realized it was a mistake and ordered the much more expensive Rascal). The coasting brake makes the bike heavy, it prevented her from pulling up the pedal at start and it also confused the hell out of her while pedaling, she would sometimes mistake the direction of pedaling and activate the break, causing her to stumble or fall. It would also be one more thing to unlearn later on.
i gave up on the problem about 18 months ago so i didn't keep up with the research area. is this yours? the runtimes are of course very good but i don't see a comparison on how good the approximation is vs telamalloc (or just ILP). i'll say this though: it's miraculuos that the impl is so small.
There is some value in not having a "Coyote vs. Acme" film released this year (either by Netflix or the Library of Congress) because they could try to make a profitable version soon but people may not give a new version a fair chance if a really bad version was released recently.
If they want to delay release to wait for better market conditions, absolutely understandable. But if they’re just going to destroy culture out of tax code mechanics, doesn’t hurt to be noisy. At least give it a chance to be preserved with some sort of arrangement.
What I mean is this movie is so bad it will ruin it for the next "Coyote" movie, so they don't want anyone to see this movie. Maybe the only compromise that works is to put it in a time capsule and not open it for 100 years.
I think your first proposal addresses the root cause.
But the second proposal - forcing municipalities to write options with unlimited potential losses - is silly. The whole point of the zoning authority is to say "it'll be best for the neighborhood in the long run for there to be some retail shops here", and it makes sense whether you're talking about a lot or the first floor of a building. If the development isn't profitable with the ground-floor retail requirement, then just don't build it.
Some sort of option might work, but it would have to be something like: the municipality can choose to rent the space for a fixed price if it's vacant for long enough. This encourages the landlord to rent it for some higher price.
If a property is vacant for 6 or more months out of a year, the (government regulating this) can forcefully change the 'offered' terms to be as good as the best for any active lease's term item among all leases within 10 miles, and also go beyond with up to 50% discounts on any monetary restrictions imposed in those terms. This includes deposit and lease rate.
The former part is to break unusually onerous terms that might exist which I'm not aware of. The latter is the club to encourage flexibility and settling on not long term national retail clients.
You might want to pay for the Made For iPhone certification for some things, but I doubt most cases have it.
reply