howrar

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

If [...] youre not trying to save them, what does it matter?

That's the problem I'm currently addressing, isn't it?

If you are trying to save youre not keeping hard cash youre investing it.

The general recommendation for savings is to first create a sufficiently large emergency fund. This is meant to cover things like sudden medical bills, repairs, and other things of that nature that can't wait. This needs to be quickly accessible, so it rules out GICs. I'm guessing a plain savings account would count as cash that can expire, so that's out. That leaves us with bonds and equity. Both have a fair amount of volatility. This isn't a problem if you have enough money because everything trends upwards in the long term. If all you have is $500 saved up and you need to draw from it during a market downturn, you've probably just lost $50 of your hard earned money. That's a huge amount when you have so little. If you have $5k and you lose $50? Whatever, chump change.

Secondly, rich people definitely do not hold on to plain cash. The vast majority of their wealth is going to be in some form of investments, so if this is meant to prevent wealth concentration, I don't see how it'll manage to take anything away from them.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Most likely you'll be getting the older bills that are close to expiry if you're poor. It doesn't matter how much time they're given when they're minted.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 days ago

salt, sunflower oil and some vinegar

I mean, add an egg to that and you have mayo.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago (4 children)

They live hand to mouth.

And they'll stay there if they can't save up any money.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 days ago

Besides the temperature differential that everyone else mentioned, there's also sometimes the need to defrost the outside bits, which means running the heat pump in reverse and undoing a bit of the heating it already did.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 23 points 3 days ago (4 children)

It requires a certain amount of flexibility. Some are born with it, others have to work for it.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 25 points 3 days ago

I like how the title implies that it targets JD Vance rather than all current and future vice presidents. Fuck that guy in particular.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Sounds like something that would be trivial for the wealthy to circumvent while being very expensive for the poor to do the same. Someone with the means can just pay someone to continuously refresh their money with new money. Unclear on how people will deal with transactions when different bills have different values from what's written on them.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

The problem with directly buying them food is that it has to be eaten within a fixed time window. Money can be used to buy food tomorrow, or it can even become food five years from now while being trivial to carry around. Getting money affords you the chance to take some time off from panhandling to attempt to better your situation because you know you have that backup food in your pocket. You're not going to get out of homelessness if leaving that street corner means you're probably going to be one day closer to dying of starvation.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 10 points 4 days ago

Can't we just stick to pinky swearing that I'm an adult?

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

What were the side-effects? I was thinking of implementing something that doesn't directly federate votes, so it would be good to know what problems I'd need to solve before that can be done.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I believe piefed creates fake accounts to do the voting so it doesn't federate the actual account that cast the vote.

 

Ten years ago, Dzmitry Bahdanau from Yoshua Bengio's group recognized a flaw in RNNs and the information bottleneck of a fixed length hidden state. They put out a paper introducing attention to rectify this issue. Not long after that, a group of researchers at Google found that you can just get rid of the RNN altogether and you still get great results with improved training performance, giving us the transformer architecture in their Attention Is All You Need paper. But transformers are expensive at inference time and scale poorly with increasing context length, unlike RNNs. Clearly, the solution is to just use RNNs. Two days ago, we got Were RNNs All We Needed?

 

Recordings for the RLC keynote talks have been released.

Keynote speakers:

  • David Silver
  • Doina Precup (Not recorded)
  • Peter Stone
  • Finale Doshi-Velez
  • Sergey Levine
  • Emma Brunskill
  • Andrew Barto
0
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by howrar@lemmy.ca to c/reinforcement_learning@lemmy.ca
 

OpenAI just put out a blog post about a new model trained via RL (I'm assuming this isn't the usual RLHF) to perform chain of thought reasoning before giving the user its answer. As usual, there's very little detail about how this is accomplished so it's hard for me to get excited about it, but the rest of you might find this interesting.

 

Following up on another question about open source funding, how does it usually work when there is funding to pay for the dev's work, then someone new joins in and makes significant contributions? Does the original dev still keep everything? Do you split the funds between the devs? If so, how do you decide how much each person gets? Are there examples of projects where something like this has happened?

 

This community has been around for a few months now. How do we feel about it? Are things working out? Any plans for further growing the community?

This is one of the topics I’ve been thinking a lot about quite a bit for the past few years (i.e. how to set up a community that values discussions with diverse viewpoints), so I thought I’d share some of my thoughts in relation to what I’m seeing here.

  1. I think such a community necessarily needs to be a full self-contained instance, or else you’ll get very little activity. Think about how these discussions usually start. Someone posts an article/meme/question/etc, a few people show up and comment with similar thoughts about it worded in slightly different ways, then another shows up and goes against the grain, everyone dogpiles on them, and that’s when the real discussion starts. Very rarely do people go out of their way to ask “what do you think of X controversial topic?” And even if you do, that only leads to a very high level discussion that very quickly gets stale. If you get discussion in the context of specific events, then these discussions can be grounded in reality and lead to more unique context-dependent takes each time it comes up.

  2. Regarding upvotes/downvotes: as stated in the rules, they should be used to measure whether a post/comment is a positive contribution to the discussion rather than the number of people who agree with your viewpoint. I don’t believe there’s a way to actually enforce this with the voting system we currently have, but I also think a relatively simple change can fix it. It will require a bit of coding.

    My proposal is a voting system with two votes: one to say that you agree/disagree, and another to say good/bad contribution. With this system, you can easily see if someone only thinks posts they agree with are good contributions, and you can use that information to calculate a total score that weighs their votes accordingly. It’s also small enough of a change that I think most people won’t have a problem figuring it out.

Thoughts?

Also, thank you Ace for taking the initiative in creating this place. It makes me happy to see that others want to see this change too.

 

There's many posts here with the purpose of convincing people to support electoral reform. Not so much that's actually actionable. What do we do if we want to change things? For a start, does anyone have information on who's responsible for the election system at each level of government in each of the major cities?

 

I think it's generally agreed upon that large files that change often do not belong while small files that never change are fine. But there's still a lot of middle ground where the answer is not so clear to me.

So what's your stance on this? Where do you draw the line?

 

I suspect this is a problem with posts that have extremely long bodies like this one: https://slrpnk.net/comment/8035803

I'm trying to scroll down to the top first comment and inevitably overshoot. When I i try to scroll back up, it suddenly jumps back to the middle of the OP's body.

 
 

I was looking up when babies can safely start eating untoasted bread and one of the images led me to this website that sells... stuff? Are they selling me the question? Who knows.

Then if you scroll down to the related products, you can buy a basketball club for $30, down from $15!

I'm guessing this is some phishing website looking to steal credit cards. I also still haven't found an answer to my original question.

 

Is it possible for posts to show the domain (TLD and SLD) of link posts?

Use case: I don't want to watch videos so I want to avoid clicking YouTube links. I would like to know that they are YouTube videos without having my phone spend the next minute trying to open YouTube.

view more: ‹ prev next ›