He dumped his wife and abandoned his child to be with this woman 18 years younger than him, and he used drugs his entire adult life, long before he met her. No, I would not describe her as a predator.
What's the source on the claim that he used drugs his entire adult life? I thought he had been sober from heroin for decades and only drank alcohol. Additionally, I'm not sure doing drugs alone qualifies one as a bad person.
In the book I read about it, people interviewed claimed she would use in front of him and supply him, intentionally sabotaging his sobriety because it kept him more easily manipulated.
As per the comment about the book above, "she would use in front of him".
In any case, using drugs is something people do. Whether famous or not. Famous people, in fast paced professions, dealing with fame, use them 10x more.
People also cheat or end relationships and go with another person, often younger. Not even in small numbers, even above 50% of marriages end like that. Passion fades, another person might reignite the joy of love.
It is what is is. Nothing especially bad as far as things people do is concerned, except if one thinks like some kind of prude.
She was clearly enabling him and playing him, that’s predatory. A similar thing happened between Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love. The friendship between Heath Ledger and Mary-Kate Olsen was very suspicious too.
No, it’s sexist to read about men being abused by manipulative women and assume misogyny. It stinks of a bias that favors women so intensely that it treats dead men as simply some kind of social breakage. That’s sad.
From what I understand he wasn’t actively doing hard drugs, but had earlier in his life. Maybe that’s not correct. I’m not sure. But if he was addicted and she or anyone else was further encouraging or indulging his addiction, well, that’s abusive by any definition I hold.
I’m not sure about his personal relationships, and don’t care much besides leaving an internet comment, but why are you so quick to dismiss that he may have experienced being manipulated or taken advantage of?
I see. Is there a class you take when graduating from boy to man that makes you impervious to manipulation? I must have missed the email telling me when class was being held. All I got was this Ted talk https://youtu.be/v4TVV6_2K2M
I'm looking at the syllabus for that class, but I'm not seeing the part where you become immune to manipulation. Responsible for your actions is covered in week two, but I'm really not seeing the manipulation armor section of the course. Could you help me please?
Sure, look in the course notes for week three: "being manipulated doesn't absolve you of responsibility either".
"I was manipulated" isn't some magic wand to throw around and absolve an adult of responsibility.
Even less so when the manipulation doesn't involve some elaborate con scheme, but simply the allure of a sexy younger woman, not to mention being blatantly explicit about it, about the fact they just want a casual relationship with you, and even ask you to stop being obsessed with them.
Isn't she an adult woman? I don't understand your line of reasoning here. Because someone is a man they can't be manipulated or taken advantage of? Is that what you're suggesting?
I quite disliked him. He always came off as a smug asshole, and I think the evidence backs that up.
His core shtick was being a food hipster which often involved putting down others preferences to prove how superior he was. For example saying that a Chicken McNugget was the most disgusting thing he has ever eaten.
He treated his staff like trash on one hand while publicly proclaiming "Mistreat the floor staff and you are dead to me." for cool guy points.
Add to that the incredible narcissism of dumping both his wives for younger women as soon as he could, but then playing the victim when his new younger wife cheats on him.
>His core shtick was being a food hipster which often involved putting down others preferences to prove how superior he was. For example saying that a Chicken McNugget was the most disgusting thing he has ever eaten.
This is a difference between BLAKE3 and most other hash functions. In the usual arrangement ("Merkle–Damgård"), each block depends on the previous one, so the only way to verify some "slice" of the input is to re-hash the whole thing. But when you arrange the input into a tree shape (a "Merkle tree") instead, suddenly the right half of the tree does not depend on the left half until the very last step at the very top. If you give me the input to that last step, I can verify that it matches the root hash that I know, now I have the hashes ("chaining values") I'd need to verify either the left half or the right half without the other. Then I do our favorite trick in computer science, which is to recursively apply that same procedure all the way down, until I have an efficient "path" to whatever part of the tree I actually care about.
> Do note that binary trees are mostly an obsolete legacy today — they are way too cache-unfriendly
BTree is not Binary Tree. It's B-Tree and is cache-friendly
> C++20 with concepts mostly reproduce the traits.
C++20 concepts are not the same as traits. Concepts are structural and awkward to use compared to Traits which are nominal. There are other important differences, too.
They've been at these programs for decades; if they were effective we wouldn't be in a drug epidemic At some point you have to cut your losses and accept that the only benefits were the politicians Flock donated to.
I'm not saying you have to abolish CBP. I'm saying they should be protecting the border and this ain't it.
Do you feel the same way about murder? Gary, Indiana has a murder problem for decades. Should we stop prosecuting it? Would murder get better or worse?
Millions of illegal aliens have entered the US under Biden. They're not all hanging at the border. Of course CBP needs to go everywhere in the US to remove all of them.
Before terrorists it was drugs, before that it was communists, before that it was communists with less weed and shorter hair.
Eventually you realize your enemy isn't the system. The system is like a misbehaving toddler that's never been disciplined. It acts as badly as it can get away with. Your enemy is your fellow countryman, you coworkers, your own family. And from that realization comes nothing actionable nor good conclusions, only despair...
ICE has very little legal authority and is yet the current president’s ground troops to lock up everyone who looks foreign. I’d say they have all the power they need.
ICE can walk into your house / pull you out of the car with masks on and kidnap you without showing you any papers. That's more power than a lot of other agencies
Trump wasn't in office at that time. He urged Republicans to not pass it for various reasons which I will not enumerate here, and CBP was funded weeks later.
The reasons you don’t want to enumerate here are “he wanted only Republicans to look good on the border by ensuring that nothing could get passed while a Democrat is president”. He doesn’t care about the border, he cares about authoritarianism and party politics.
Translated to "Even though I know that most republicans said they didn't want to go against someone who had a very good chance winning in 2024 for the fear that they would get their political career destroyed, because that is what Trump explicitly said to them, I will vaguely allude to some fringe statements about things that haven never been proven true in regards to other aspects of the bill as the reason Republicans didn't vote for it, because in no way shape or form will I ever admit that I was wrong.
I don't get why people on your side still think that saying shit like this makes you sound smart. That ship has long sailed.
There were a lot of things not to like about the bill, such as being tied to Israel/Ukraine aid, setting an emergency trigger that normalized flooding the border, and it being a token measure for Biden to use in the election.
I think the point here is not that it does compaction (which Codex also already does) - but that the model was trained with examples of the Codex compaction, so it should perform better when compaction has taken place (a common source for drops in performance for earlier models).
I am also trying to understand the difference between compaction, and what IDEs like Cursor do when they "summarize" context over long-running conversations.
Is this saying that said summarization now happens at the model level? Or are there other differences?
My understanding is that they trained it to explicitly use a self-prune/self-edit tool that trims/summarizes portions of its message history (e.g. use tool results from file explorations, messages that are no longer relevant, etc) during the session, rather than "panic-compact" at the end. In any case, it would be good if it does something like this.
reply