How does one "interpret" public knowledge to time bets so accurately right before Trump's announcements?

I mean that's why insiders are being investigated right?

But sometimes the answer is more difficult than it seems. Is a mid level military officer an insider? If you overheard a conversation on Capitol Hill are you an insider?

First, you’re describing the insider trading that is not permitted.

Second, the majority of prediction markets are predicting utterly mundane things like sports. The tiny number of news grabbing markets are not representative.

Will the new OSs be able overcome Apple and Google lobbies to restrict banking apps to "secure" (i.e. under their control) devices?

It's interesting how "real Unix" is still thrown around as a badge of prestige when Linux basically runs the world now.

LLMs are deterministic in the sense that a fixed linear regression model is deterministic. Like linear regression, however, they do however encode a statistical model of whatever they're trying to describe -- natural language for LLMs.

"Under these circumstances, requiring the Department to prolong its use of Anthropic’s AI technology, whether directly or through contractors, strikes us as a substantial judicial imposition on military operations." (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cadc.42...)

Does not designating Anthropic a "supply chain risk" actually require the DoD to use Anthropic's services?

If they can't tell their suppliers not to depend on Anthropic models and services, then... yes, potentially?

What prevents the DoD from saying "no" without the designation?

How does this compare with ZFS's object storage backend? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46620673

Notably, this is going to manage your data in it's native format (i.e. you can actually read-write the files out of the S3 bucket as if they were actual objects, mapping 1:1 to each file). The ZFS backend is (almost certainly) a block-based format that is persisted to S3 (meaning that you cannot use it for existing data in S3, and you cannot access data written through ZFS via S3).

History doesn't start in 1979. One can draw a direct line to those events from 1953.

How many Russian deaths have been caused by US proxies in Ukraine so far? Do those justify an attack on the US by Russia?

>They haven't been following international law since 1979.

History doesn't start in 1979. Why not go back to 1953? Overthrowing another country's elected government is no more conscionable under international law.

> Why not go back to 1953? Overthrowing another country's elected government is no more conscionable under international law

Nobody said you can't. I don't think the point is undermined. Neither the U.S. nor Iran have shown any consistent affection for international law.

> This "both sides" game does not carry much weight when one side, the US and Britain, made the bad faith move on Iran first

Trying to disentangle who did what first in the Middle East is a fool's errand. Practically any living human can trace descendence to someone who was harmed by any other group in that region because that's where the first civilisation was born and almost every one after it had cause for crossroads.

> Complaining I am being hit back because I hit first, does not elicit support

If one dude stabs another, they're at fault. If that dude stabs the first one back, I'm sympathetic to their cause of action but not how they prosecuted it.

> Norway nationalised it's oil, Iran had equal sovereign right to do so

If Iran nationalised its oil and then didn't go on a vendetta against Israel, together with various spawned proxy groups dotting the region, every one of their neighbors wouldn't be standing by today while they get pummeled.

> Trying to disentangle who did what first in the Middle East is a fool's errand.

Not at all and we are talking Iran not ME in general. Your sentence recalls to the mind that famous quote by Upton Sinclair about self imposed lack of comprehension.

It's ridiculous to think of a just prosecution when only one side is held accountable and the other gets hegemony enforced immunity.

When Iran nationalised their oil US used a military coup to upend their parliamentary democracy and place a puppet dictator in place, who among other things ran torture camps for dissenters. Iran's action are a retaliation against US and its proxies who have meddled and attacked Iran's sovereign destiny and financial health.

Hardly anyone consistently follows international law.

Where are all of the ZFS corruption stories? Or are there simply fewer of those?

Not sure about the stats, but it does feel like there are fewer. So from what I know encryption and sending fs state had bugs in ZFS.

And on btrfs anything above raid1 (5,6 etc) has had very serious bugs. Actually read an opinion somewhere (don't remember where) raid5,6 on btrfs cannot work due to on-disk format being just bad for the case. I guess this is why raid1c3/c4 is being promoted and worked on now?

Most of them are from new features that didn't get a proper shakedown test, like encryption.

I love ZFS, but have been corrected a couple of times when I said it was bomb proof. Can't remember the details, but it has served me faithfully for 10 years or so? Plus the bugs were pretty niche if I recall correctly.

Edit: found some comments below: ZFS on Linux has had many bugs over the years, notably with ZFS-native encryption and especially sending/receiving encrypted volumes. Another issue is that using swap on ZFS is still guaranteed to hang the kernel in low memory scenarios, because ZFS needs to allocate memory to write to swap.