As someone once said it best, Win32 is the only stable ABI on Linux: https://blog.hiler.eu/win32-the-only-stable-abi/

Because free software doesn't need such a thing as a stable ABI.

There does exist flatpak, everything that would benefit from a stable ABI could use that.

And the people attacked in the weird scene are people that tended to just be dissappeared by police. Gay men. Prostitutes.

The leg is used both as a urban legend that was told at the region at the time, but also as a metaphor. The surrealist scene where it shows the leg brutally attacking people at night: all the people attacked are prostitutes, gays, etc. People that during the dictatorship the police used to just dissappear, and society turned a blind eye to it.

And it is meant to feel meandering cause that is how this period feels for people trying to study it. There are many cases that we don't know what happened. We just know that the people were killed/disappeared. The perpetrators were never brought to Justice. We are not even sure who the specific perpetrators are in a lot of cases.

This is how the Brazilian military dictatorship operated. There are people in Brazil who want to go back to this period. They say that everything was better. The truth is that a lot of stuff that was bad, was so bad that we don't even have the records to properly reconstruct what happened.

>The leg is used both as a urban legend that was told at the region at the time, but also as a metaphor. The surrealist scene where it shows the leg brutally attacking people at night: all the people attacked are prostitutes, gays, etc. People that during the dictatorship the police used to just dissappear, and society turned a blind eye to it.

Yeah, so I had to lookup the leg after watching the movie. My interpretation was that it wasn't actually really surrealism. They juxtapose that scene with the lady reading from the newspaper about the attacking leg as if it was real. The reason I think this supports the "from the future journalist's perspective" interpretation is that those were legitimate articles ran, while there were serious cases not being reported on things like people going missing by the dictatorship. I think they included it to show the absurdity of what information was available and what information wasn't in the papers from that time. Also because of the lore of it all.

That's perfectly nice idea but still doesn't make for a good movie. Making a good movie comes before a nice idea, if a movie is what you're making.

Oh I agree. This was a post-movie rationalization. I think the ending was super frustrating but it was one of those things where after ruminating for a bit, it's like, "okay fine I get it." Maybe, I'm being too charitable to the director. The movie itself was dissatisfying, the reflection on the movie was better.

Your idea of a good movie, you mean to say.

> People that during the dictatorship the police used to just dissappear, and society turned a blind eye to it.

Reminds me of something.

Absolutely. For more progressive democrat voters already been harbouring bad feelings around the legitimacy of the establishment candidate from previous elections. The two party system already loses a ton of the feeling of choice and participation in Americans. The primary is the escape valve. It is supposed to be when people that care about politics get to argue about policy, direction, etc. Even if you don't agree with the final candidate, you feel like you helped shape the direction of the process. By skipping this, even if there were other circumstances, it feels like a huge turn off for that base of the party.

And then for other democrats, the feeling when you have an unpopular president like Biden was seen at the time is to go anti estabilishment. But Kamala was Bidens VP. She couldnt run an anti estabilishment campaign when she was part of the estabilishment.

If there had been a primary, whoever was the candidate, even if it was Kamala herself, would have been much better positioned for the General Election.

> whether thinking requires exceeding the Turing computable

I've never seen any evidence that thinking requires such a thing.

And honestly I think theoretical computational classes are irrelevant to analysing what AI can or cannot do. Physical computers are only equivalent to finite state machines (ignoring the internet).

But the truth is that if something is equivalent to a finite state machine, with an absurd number of states, it doesn't really matter.

Hence why I finished the sentence "and we have no evidence to suggest that is even possible".

I think it's exceedingly improbable that we're any more than very advanced automatons, but I like to keep the door ajar and point out that the burden is on those claiming this to present even a single example of a function we can compute that is outside the Turing computable if they want to open that door..

> Physical computers are only equivalent to finite state machines (ignoring the internet)

Physical computers are equivalent to Turing machines without the tape as long as they have access to IO.

Does JSON have support for protocol versioning?

Yep: JSON schema Alternatively, with typescript you can write:

export type FooRpcV1 : { version: 1, ... } export type FooRpcV2 : { version: 2, ... }

in zod syntax, and it'll do the right thing statically and at runtime (ask an LLM for help with the syntax).

With protobufs (specifically protoc), you get some type like:

export type FooRpc : { version : 1 | 2, v1fieldA? : string, v1fieldB? : int, v2fieldB? : string, v2fieldB? string };

which is 2^5 message types, even if all fields of both versions were mandatory. Then application logic needs to validate it.

This used to be true, but now I don't think it is anymore. Modern frameworks and modern screen readers have no issue with acessibility.

Some survey from WebAIM found that 99.3% of screen reader users have JavaScript enabled.

So... are they really in accessibility territory still? Only people I still see complaining about Javascript being required are people that insist the web should just be static documents with hyperlinks like it was in the early 90s.

Can you find a modern source with valid reasons for accomodating non-JS users?

Slow/lossy connections: JS may not load, but site still works.

Users that prefer non-animated pages and disable JS for this reason.

Users who prioritize security.

Users of older devices in which your JS can trigger errors. Yes, these exist. Not everyone can upgrade their older device. Many people do not even have their own device to use.

But is Google buying those GPU chips for their own use, or to have them on their data centers for their cloud customers?

google buys nvidia GPUs for cloud, I don't think they use them much or at all internally. The TPUs are both used internally, and in cloud, and now it looks like they are delivering them to customers in their own data centers.

When I was there a few years ago, we only got CPUs and GPUs for training. TPUs were in too high of demand.

I can see them being used for training if they're vacant.

The various AI accelerator chips, such as TPUs and NVidia GPUs, are only compatible to extent that some of the high level tools like PyTorch and Triton (kernel compiler) may support both, which is like saying that x86 and ARM chips are compatible since gcc supports them both as targets, but note this does not mean that you can take a binary compiled for ARM and run it on an x86 processor.

For these massive, and expensive to train, AI models the differences hit harder since at the kernel level, where the pedal hits the metal, they are going to be wringing every last dollar of performance out of the chips by writing hand optimized kernels for them, highly customized to the chip's architecture and performance characteristics. It may go deeper than that too, with the detailed architecture of the models themselves tweaked to best perform on a specific chip.

So, bottom line is that you can't just take a model "compiled to run on TPUs", and train it on NVidia chips just because you have spare capacity there.

>but they are also buying as many Nvidia chips as they can get their hands on

>But is Google buying those GPU chips for their own use

>google buys nvidia GPUs for cloud, I don't think they use them much or at all internally.

We're not talking about GPUs.

Sorry, TPUs. Duh, that completely obliterated my argument. Anyways ...

Both. Internal are customers too.

It's not about power users. It's about regular users and the patterns they have learned.

The mobile ecosystem was built in a way to funnel all users into apps. That's the experience that is optimized for use, that's the experience users feel safe and secure. Barriers were put in place on what apps are even allowed to do (like not having alternative app stores, or a browser in iOs that is not just a webview of Safari). This created an enviroment where developers and companies are forced to develop to this ecosystem, and pay the Apple tax, since that's where the users are. And an alternative system is impossible to be created since Apple uses it's power at the hardware and operating system level to make alternatives impossible.

And someone will probably come and say that this is all users choice to be locked down in the walled garden. That the walled garden is keeping the users safe, so therefore it is only fair that Apple gets to capture 30% of all digital economical activity.

Are there links to samples of the games? Couldn't find it in the github repo, but also might just not know where they are.

I'd want to watch a simulated table with AI-voiced dialogue, internal monologues, and move visualizations. Seems like a fun thing to watch others play. Wouldn't want to play that particular game with friends I intend to keep. :D

Game logs are in data_public/comparison/ - each JSON has the full game state, moves, and messages. For example, check gemini_vs_all_7chips.json to see the alliance bank betrayals in action.