I think vinyl would, but as others have noted, it probably wouldn't satisfy the "3D printed" condition.
I know this wasn't in the original ask, but my focus was on what I would be able to do, as far as archival storage, if I had a 3D printer. The assumption being that it's easier for me to have, maintain, and use a 3D printer than it would be for me to have a vinyl press.
The study states no conflict of interest, but found it a bit ironic that the next link on HN was https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46682534 , stating that "Nearly a third of social media research has undisclosed ties to industry"
There are a lot of "foundations" funding their research. I don't have the patience to go searching through them to see if they may be causes of conflict of interest first, second or third hand. I just assume there's a conflict unless other research from reputable sources backs it up.
the issue of having multiple inputs able to be indexable by ints, is exactly why i prefer that type hints remain exactly as "hints" and not as mandated checks. my philosophy for type hints is that they are meant to make codebases easier to understand without getting into a debugger. their functional equivalence should be that of comments. it's a cleaner more concise way of describing a variable instead of using a full on docstring.
though maybe there's a path forward to give a variable a sort of "de-hint" in that in can be everything BUT this type(i.e. an argument can be any indexable type, except a string)
>though maybe there's a path forward to give a variable a sort of "de-hint" in that in can be everything BUT this type
I think this is called a negation type, and it acts like a logical NOT operator. I'd like it too, and I hear that it works well with union types (logical OR) and intersection types (logical AND) for specifying types precisely in a readable way.
I believe the internet's search for a truth-seeking authority is about to come to a close, and the clear winner is GrokAI. There is a clear indication that a major populace of the internet's(read: X fka twitter) default action is to post a "@grok is this true" when faced with an uncertainty. I don't believe this will get any less pervasive. While I don't think this is a necessarily bad outcome, I don't know if I would like to call this a good one, just yet
X/Twitter has almost 600 million active monthly users, I wouldn't call this an exactly small bubble. Maybe I should clarify my previous statement to say I don't mean this to be true for the internet as a whole, but a good majority of it. Information flow on X doesn't strictly follow the boundaries of "X users"
The only people who think Grok is anything other than Musk’s puppet are not informed or ignoring the evidence. It’s clear he keeps tweaking it to puppet his views. Whenever Grok provides output in conflict with Musk, the response is "we'll fix it" versus "I defer to my supposedly state of the art frontier foundational model driven chatbot."
I don't think it's fair to just right off Grok as Musk's puppet, when there are millions of DAUs. Musk's inability to keep his hands off of fine-tuning the system prompt of Grok is concerning at the very least, but that dismisses the fact that there real people are indeed using Grok, and real people do indeed call upon it for truth-seeking. Just like real people used Google, CNN, NYTimes, ChatGPT.
fwiw: I think it's wrong that Grok responses are prepended with "What would Elon say". still doesn't change the truth that people are and will be continuing to use it
A captive audience does not create truth. Certainly, it demonstrates the ability to control the narrative in a sticky social network (the DAUs you mention), but it does not create truth in of itself. Real people consume brain rot at scale on TikTok, does that make that content truth? Some of the content may contain facts and truth, but anything that is not that is a shared delusion, opinions, and entertainment.
X counts as active users anybody that sees a xeet, including the ones embed to websites. The real numbers are way lower. And I would not expect even 1% of it to routinely ask a bot to clarify things
I was working on reading the comments on this post, and got tired of scrolling with the mousepad. I had not used any of the LLMs in a few weeks now and wanted to see how they fared for writing a web extension to let me browse hacker news via arrow keys and the "prev" and "next" comment buttons. My goal was to write 0 lines of code myself and rely solely on copy-pasting(successful in my eyes). ChatGPT 4o disappointed me on getting a final product, but Claude Sonnet blew me away enough to push me to pull out my credit card to subscribe to a pro plan.
