The problem isn't the laws and the prices and the monopolies and all that stuff.
The problem is that people don't see anything wrong or shameful about being the person who was bitching about the noises roosters make in 2017 and then also being the person bitching about inflexible supply chains and egg prices in 2025.
Every state has right-to-farm laws. Most only protect commercial farming, but not all and sometimes the definition of commercial is rather loose, so it might be worth looking into.
But those are often trumped by county or municipal laws.
e.g. Most urban/suburban parts of California either restrict or require permits to raise backyard chickens (also, predators are a huge problem):
(Palo Alto: Up to six hens. Mountain View: Up to four hens. Los Altos: One hen per 1000 sq feet, no permit required. Sunnyvale: Zoning laws apply. Santa Clara: zoning restrictions apply. San Jose: Up to six without a permit, up to 20 with a permit. San Mateo: Up to 10 birds, depending on plot size, with a minimum plot requirement of 2500 sq feet (excludes most people). No permit required. San Francisco: Up to four, roosters allowed, no permit required. Oakland: No number restrictions, no permit required. Berkeley: No number restrictions, no permit required, roosters allowed. Anarchy!)
What we need roundabout now is a webcam campaign/tutorial on legal backyard chicken raising...
> San Francisco: Up to four, roosters allowed, no permit required
Holy shit: SF is really dense in some areas, but people still have backyards, e.g., Mission District. Can you imagine being surrounded by neighbors with roosters crowing when the sun rises? It would be hell.
No idea about how viable this in each of those cities, but maybe 2025 is the time for us to go read https://www.reddit.com/r/BackYardChickens/ (similar to bleach, hand-sanitizer and toilet paper in 2020.) Yes the noise around dawn is why roosters are sometimes restricted (or make your neighbors way more likely to complain). My neighbor in San Jose had a rooster that crowed 25% of mornings.
I should have said above the $$$ reason predators are a huge problem in urban/suburban areas is you can't legally shoot them/ use BB guns, and it's near-impossible to use poison (if you have pets or small kids, or your neighbors' pets pass through). So if you regularly have to spend $500++ on a professional exterminator for a single fox or raccoon, there goes your entire $ viability. It's not at all like a farm in a rural county. HN business idea: is there any multiple infrared camera security setup that can behaviorally distinguish between predators vs your own pet, in the middle of the night? without needing to AirTag your pets?
It would affect people who were not allowed to work because their company was not sure if they are allowed to work in New Zealand. At individuals level sure, this is going to have little to no effect.
But - lot of people need their employers permission to work in a different country and Employers have specific policies about where an Employee is allowed to work depending on Employee's status in that country.
Magnus may be better player than Gukesh, but the reason he is not defending WC title is not because Gukesh or any opponent is not good enough, but because it takes too much freaking preparation to defend WC title and he doesn't think it is worth the effort.
A completely unprepared Magnus vs a 100% prepared opponent will go to a better prepared opponent (See Magnus interviews if you don't believe this). 4-6 months spending memorizing lines is not easy. It is too much work. Magnus has already proven he is GOAT, he doesn't have to prove anything.
But - this doesn't take away achievement from other players, if Magnus doesn't want to be bothered doing all the prep.I wonder if we will say the same thing in any other sport.
Ma Long for example - did not participated in Paris Olympic singles, does that mean Fan Zedong or Truls moregard achievement was any less? Nobody would say that.
I was thinking about this and one way of thinking is what u said. We already allow sale of spaceships which have non-zero failure rate. So we don't necessarily need zero failure rate self driving.
But a problem with cars is, usually ur malfunctioning calculator just harms u, but a malfunctioning car will affect people who don't agree with ur choice of driving non-zero failure rate self driving car.
>hose parties I throw are the highlight of my year. My parents staying here with me is important to me, I wouldn't have it any other way.
There is a silver lining in smaller houses. They tend to be in denser neighborhoods and hence has some benefits in raising kids. There is no need to setup play dates, they can literally hear each other screaming and come out to play.
In my bigger house neighborhood, I see very few kids just playing casually outside and hence we have to setup play dates. Yes now I have place for table tennis table that I always wanted but I have to call my friends over because bigger house in my case also is bit more further in suburbs.
So big house might be great for parties and hosting guests but i probably traded away closeness to my existing friends for myself and kids both. I just made my median day more boring than before.
>but I've always been pretty leery of giving up the trivial snapshotting and rollbacks and other creature comforts of old-school virtualization when it comes to deploying long running applications,
You can do that too with k8s with APIs which support more than just one backend.
I am the author of k8s resizing feature and its been GAed for awhile and feedback we have got so far has been good. If anything running inside k8s makes it relatively easy to support resizing. You just need to specify new size for PVC and it will both perform resizing on the cloudprovider and of the file system (if needed).
Modifying IOPS and other volume attributes is something less frequently needed but we just released alpha support for that too, if you must need it.
We have also added support for reporting volume usage in CSI specs, which I know some operators use to automatically resize volumes when certain threshold is reached (I however do not recommend using ephemeral metrics for automating something like this). But point is - you can actually define CRDs that persist volume usage and have it used by an higher level operator.
Another thing is - k8s makes it relatively easy to take snapshots which can be automated too and that should give someone additional peace of mind if something goes haywire.
Obviously I am biased and I know there are some lingering issues that require manual intervention when using stateful workloads (such as when a node crashes), but k8s should be just as good for running stateful workloads IMO.
Another thing is - k8s volumes are nothing but bind mounts from host namespace into container's namespace and hence there should be no performance penalty of using them.
Gpt-4 fails the Turing test by default because it does not claim to be human therefore it’s trivial for a judge to identify it. It would be interesting to train gpt to pass the Turing test, but I think for any reasonable judge it would still fail.
The only thing I've seen is that people given 5 minutes with either an AI or a real person guess correctly about 60% of the time. But 5 minutes is only enough time to exchange 2 or 3 messages, hardly a thorough test.
Taking a step back, this argument seems headed towards defining what exactly the "Turing test" is. A lot of debates devolve into arguments over the definition of a single word. That's okay, maybe I do have an uncommon definition about what the "Turing test" is.
Regardless of the definition of "Turing test" though, my underlying argument remains. I haven't seen any AI pass a thorough test in which it tries to imitate a human. Tests are either too short or depend on an unsuspecting person who doesn't know they are participating in the test. Maybe I'm moving the goal posts, but my personal goal, the goal I've been watching for, is for an AI that is indistinguishable from a real person in a thorough test[0] and no AI has passed such a test as far as I know.
[0]: My own definition of a thorough test is: 2 humans and 1 AI in a chat, given at least an hour to chat, and give the humans a reward if they guess correctly.
Where are these articles? I know that ChatGPT can't pass the Turing test, because in about 2 minutes it would tell you that, as an AI language learning model, it can't answer your question. Presumably that's just a function of its initial instructions, and the API version of GPT-4 behaves somewhat differently. Is the non-Chat GPT-4 capable of pretending to be a human when asked direct questions?
Given how frequently I can’t tell whether I’m talking with a human or robot, it seems certain that it has passed. There are some constraints, like what GPT is willing to discuss, how long it takes to respond, and forgetfulness in long conversations. But even those would be expected in humans to some extent.
