This somewhat silly statement reminds me of when a city person moved in to a house on a piece of land bordered on all sides by mine in rural Sweden. Come autumn the trees - of which we have many, living on the forest edge as we do - started shedding leaves which also ended up on the gravel path leading to his house. He came to me and asked me to remove those trees bordering the path because they drop leaves on it which he doesn't want there. I had to explain to him that he no longer lived in the city where the streets are swept, that instead he now more or less lived in the forest where trees are the dominant life form and that these happened to be mostly deciduous trees which shed their leaves every autumn and as such the solution to his conundrum is not to urbanise the forest but to accept the occasional cover of leaves and the occasional branch on the path, remove them when they're in the way and otherwise just leave them be. Not long after that he bought a garden tractor which he now uses in a futile attempt to recreate his urban park in the forest. The trees keep on winning though, they're many against his one tractor.
The Trees
Available on Hemispheres
Music: Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson
Lyrics: Neil Peart
There is unrest in the Forest
There is trouble with the trees
For the Maples want more sunlight
And the Oaks ignore their pleas.
The trouble with the Maples
(And they’re quite convinced they’re right)
They say the Oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light
But the Oaks can’t help their feelings
If they like the way they’re made
And they wonder why the Maples
Can’t be happy in their shade?
There is trouble in the Forest
And the creatures all have fled
As the Maples scream ‘Oppression!’
And the Oaks, just shake their heads
So the Maples formed a Union
And demanded equal rights
‘The Oaks are just too greedy
We will make them give us light’
Now there’s no more Oak oppression
For they passed a noble law
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet,
Axe,
And saw…
> It is highly unlikely, at least in the species I’m familiar with, that a tree will just fall over.
>
> Evolution tends to select against that kind of thing.
This is correct when the trees are bordered on all sides by more trees. On the forest edge - which is what this seems to be - things tend to be different though and the occasional tree does fall due to storm, rock slides, wildlife activities, water erosion and more. Especially when the forest edge is relatively new, i.e. the bordering land has been cleared somewhere within the last 40-50 years these edge effects can be sizeable. Eventually the forest edge thins out once the larger trees have all fallen to create a more gradual progression from open land to forest and there will be fewer large trees to fall on bordering land.
> I have my own Claude subscription. I’m willing to pay for hand crafted, artisanal knowledge and thought products. “Vote with your wallet.”
Soon you'll be able to buy hand-crafted, artisanal knowledge and thought-derived prompts for your Claude subscription just like you used to buy hand-crafted, artisanal knowledge and thought-derived code for your computer.
Are prompts covered by copyright? Will we see "Prompt copying is killing the prompt industry - and it's illegal" on the prompt delivery service site?
> Soon you'll be able to buy hand-crafted, artisanal knowledge and thought-derived prompts for your Claude subscription just like you used to buy hand-crafted, artisanal knowledge and thought-derived code for your computer.
I'm unsure Claude will be out there observing and reporting in meat space. "Three months maybe, six months definitely." LLMs and inference only sees what it can access digitally. It doesn't see or experience outside of the aquarium. How much does a goldfish in a bowl know about the world? Only about as far as it can see.
Human content when I want a human perspective, search engine results when I want a search engine for a lossy jpeg of the internet (or a sausage machine pushing tokens through a formal proof based or test driven system).
> LLMs and inference only sees what it can access digitally. It doesn't see or experience outside of the aquarium. How much does a goldfish in a bowl know about the world? Only about as far as it can see.
Most of the (Western?) world is covered in cameras, and I bet the video feeds will soon be feed into the training pipelines. And then as soon as AI is put in control of things like traffic lights, self-driving cars, logistics (e.g., delivery scheduling), then the AI will have a complete loop from which to learn: try something in the real world ("shorten this traffic light by 15s"), observe result ("traffic backs up Wednesdays at 8am"), repeat.
Surely this will teach the machine to love, feel, understand, and self reflect|actualize. The subthread context was human generated content, not machine learning for logistics and meat space Factorio (which good 'ol machine learning already did fine at).
How about articulated double-decker buses? The one does not need to exclude the other after all. It'd need a large harmonica to deal with hills and bumps or it could have separated top floors with sloping roofs.
Why were they banned? They're used in the Netherlands which is rife with small bendy streets so if that was the argument it seems to be somewhat spurious.
They sucked basically. A bendy bus takes up twice as much space as a double decker while being half as fun to ride on. Even with double deckers many bus stops operate beyond capacity with multiple buses in contention at a stop, double deckers allow 3 buses to load simultaneously allowing six busloads of people to board in a space that would only allow for 1 bendy bus, essentially tripling the capacity.
They also cause problems for other road users such as cyclists.
Bendy buses work well if your city has wide straight roads. London's roads are neither.
no, not really. occasionally the power pickup thingy would get detached from the overhead wires, but the driver had a big pole to hook them up again.
the trolleys were basically replacements for trams, which needed a lot of street furniture in the form of rails, points, etc. which caused problems for the increasing use of cars. but i always liked them (trolleys).
There were some fatalities that got a lot of attention in the media. There was also a problem with fare evasion. Some were catching fire as well. A perfect storm of issues.
In this case it was the right thing. Double deckers are better.
I didn't know until now that they're only common in Britain. I guess when travelling you don't notice things like "there aren't many double decker buses".
Also don't forget changing anything is a great opportunity for grift and politicking. Test. Evaluate. Plan. Consult. Pilot. Source. Phase out. Phase in. Maintain. A lot of public money to distribute! A lot of project credit-taking and future-progress-aligning to be image-jacked!
The right-wing media at the time latched onto them as the cause of all of society's problems, and Boris Johnson promised to get rid of them if he was elected mayor.
In addition to the other reply's issues, they replaced the dirty and stinking but British-made old Routemaster buses, they were much more accessible to the disabled and babies (pushchairs), they were used successfully elsewhere in Europe, and they use more road space which could otherwise contain an important person's car.
I think they're still used in cities outside London, but that's OK since Daily Telegraph journalists never go there.
In a penis the nerve endings are also mostly in the glans (head) so the difference isn't that big. Most of the parts of these two organs match somehow, just shifted around a bit.
> the only legal hurdle would be complying with takedown requests.
If you mean 'takedown requests' related to X content that should not be a problem since nitter does not cache content so anything taken down by X is inaccessible to nitter. If you mean takedown requests for nitter instances the question is on what grounds those requests are made - TOS violations or legal grounds? If it is the former it would be easy for X to just block the user IDs and no takedown request is needed. If it is the latter, which laws would those be based on?
Of course it can run legally. What might not be possible is to open a running instance to the general public, certainly not to paying public but an argument could be made that even allowing free access would violate some law or other. This is not a certainty though and the continued existence of products like Opera Mini speak against there being such legal prohibitions to allowing public access to content-changing proxies.
reply