Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more throwaway48476's commentslogin

AI regulation should wait until after the crash. That way AI can be regulated for what it does and not the fever dream pushed by marketers.


At that point nobody will care though. People pushing for regulation (not uniquely) want power- those that can write the regulation will be in a position to exert a lot of power over a lot of people/companies, making it an attractive thing to push for.


"Everything is gambling now"


Protip: If you call it an investment, it becomes not only respectable but it is in fact the responsible thing to do for your customer's financial security.


You get slightly better mpg on premium, just not enough to justify the cost.


Not unless you’re adjusting timing. Premium gas has lower energy per unit mass and per unit volume than standard gas.


> Not unless you’re adjusting timing.

Which, every modern ECU will do automatically based on output from the knock sensors.


Only if it has the physical ability to use more octane.

In theory, your average Camry running on 87 is pulling spark timing to ride the edge of knock for best fuel efficiency by being lean, but how much? It was designed to be safe on even kinda shitty gas, that has lower than 87 octane at points, and the ECU is going to err on the side of caution.

That naturally aspirated 2AR-FE in a Camry does not have the ability to compress harder, so if you put 93 in it, it may only be able to "utilize" the extra knock resistance up to say 89 by advancing spark timing.

Meanwhile your average Golf TSI probably can, and the VW GTI I have demonstrably gets better gas mileage on 93 octane, even though it is "rated" for 87 octane (and therefore has a lower mpg claim than it is capable of), but this was an engine that previously was rated at 91 octane and nerfs itself so hard on 87 that it is dramatically easier to stall, and the power figures are rated on 91 octane anyway.

You are almost certainly spending more money on gas even if you eke out a percentage point or two extra mpg on higher octane fuels, as they are priced at higher margins and have lower scale.


There's 9 bits in an ECC byte.


Lots of low end android boxes use cxmt ddr4.


Oil and gas suppliers have several products: gas, diesel, jet a, propane, naptha, asphalt etc.


Aren't the proportions is those essentially static?


Cracking can turn heavier oil fractions into lighter oil fractions. It's a very common procedure.


No, refineries make more heating oil in winter and more gasoline in summer driving season.


Depends a lot on the oil field, geology is random


none of those finished products come out of the ground that way.


Neither do chips, even if they all start as silicon from the ground. What the earlier comment was saying is that the actual composition of crude oil varies by location so you aren't necessarily getting the same ratio of finished products at the process. With silicon you have a bit more control over what goes into the fab. But you're still at the mercy of demand from the market.


The crude composition defines a range of possible products, not exactly ratios. Longer chain hydrocarbons are also cracked to yield more light products.


> defines a range of possible products, not exactly ratios

I'm not sure I follow, varying range necessarily implies varying ratios (e.g. a product missing from the range means its ratio is zero).

Even when in theory you can obtain some higher quality products, the composition of the crude can make it too complex and expensive to practically obtain them.

You don't want to refine gasoline from heavy crude, especially in winter when demand is lower. For gasoline or kerosene you want to start from lighter crude. Same with many undesired components (either from the crude or resulting from the refining methods), the more you have, the more complex the refining, and the resulting ratio of products you obtain varies.

So in practice what you get out of the refining process absolutely depends on the characteristics of the crude, and many other things like market demand or the capability of your refinery.

Same as with silicon. The process to make the wafer results in different quality if you want to make low tech or cutting edge semiconductor products.


That way? I was trying to say that the mix of hydrocarbon molecules is different for each and every oil field due to local geological variation. Even within the field, since eg lighter molecules presumably come out first.


The factory must grow


It would be helpful to tell users that it's just a model producing mathematically probable tokens but that would go against the AI marketing.


Telling people who are playing slot machines “it’s just a random number generator with fixed probabilities in a metal box” doesn’t usually work either


I feel like the average slot machine user is _far_ more aware of this than the average LLM user is of the nature of an LLM, tho. A lot of laypeople genuinely think that they think.


Also chatbots are explicitly designed to evoke anthropomorphizing them and to pull susceptible people into some kind of para-social relationship. Doesn't even have to be as obviously unhealthy as the "LLM psychosis" or "romantic roleplay" stuff.

I think the same thing is also relevant when people use chatbots to form opinions on unknown subjects, politics, or to seek personal life advice.


I've tried that, it doesn't work. They want to hear that from a famous person & all the famous people are telling them these things are going to take all of their jobs & then maybe also kill everyone.


And you’re a sack of meat and neurons producing learned chemical responses to external stimuli. Now tell me how useful that is.



> Meat sounds. You know how when you slap or flap meat it makes a noise? They talk by flapping their meat at each other. They can even sing by squirting air through their meat.

That's good


I find it more useful to think of myself as part of a wave function splitting thousands of times a second.


Because the poster was referring to promotion, of which elon was much more successful than the actual founders.


It wouldn't be difficult to improve Russia. Just the kelptocracy makes it impossible. "Why go to the moon when we have craters (potholes) here in samara" -some kid on tiktok.


It was so successful that they took over the FBI.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: