Subjective vs objective. Also, analogies are almost always weak rhetorical distractions. The conversation just becomes about the differences between the two things. If you want to state an opinion about X, form the thought about X, rather than just pointing to Y and asserting they're the same.
We've already reached the point where GAI art is extremely difficult to distinguish from human art and at a fraction of that cost.
I'd say that's pretty objective and it's hard to even leave room for subjective interpretation when it's so hard to tell them apart.
> Also, analogies are almost always weak rhetorical distractions.
I wasn't trying to start a discussion with them.
To say GAI will never be better than humans at art when we already know what we know today isn't a good faith logical argument, it's a tautological appeal to emotion.
>where GAI art is extremely difficult to distinguish from human art and at a fraction of that cost.
And this logic is why people don't understand how to make good game art. generating an 2d animation or real time 3d model that properly deforms is multiple magnitudes different from fooling some tiktok users with a static image in isolation. even composing a still scene will quickly reveal the lmitations of generating art for your visual novel.
Wielding a camera doesn't make you a cinematographer that can sell a movie. Generating a few realistic-ish images does not make you an artist that can sell a game.
There are events that may affect more than one machine which are not netsplits.
e.g. an ISP with common users experiences an outage, an IRC client with common users has a bug, common users within the same time zone have automated system updates run at the same time, the IRC server experiences an upstream network disruption affecting only some routes, a regional power outage occurs, a hosted bouncer service with common users has an outage, etc, etc, etc...
Rooks don't have taxicab geometry. Their metric space is compact even on an infinite board. I think you're thinking of the wazir: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wazir_(chess)
This Veritasium video does a great job at explaining how such skewed priors can easily appear in our current academic system and the paradox in general: https://youtu.be/42QuXLucH3Q?si=c56F7Y3RB5SBeL4m
Worth noting that GPIB is still very common in labs and present in modern lab equipment that's still in production. Tek's AFG31000 is one example but there's countless more.
Mil/gov customers are still die-hard GPIB users and that's a major sector for T&M sales.
Indeed. Keysight's top-of-the-line long-scale DMM, the 3458A, was redesigned (chiefly for RoHS compliance) in 2019 and the GPIB bus remains the only means to remote control that instrument.
To be fair, that's a small redesign of a 40 year old design (everything is still through hole, for example).
The AFG31k is a brand new design from the ground up and it still has GPIB! And it's far from an isolated case, GPIB has a strong network effect, pun intended.
APIs are always about people, they're an implicit contract. This is also why API design is largely the only difficult part of software design (there are tough technical challenges too sometimes, but they are much easier to plan for and contain).
It almost certainly refers to 300 mm wafers, which are the largest size used right now. They offer significantly better economics than the older 200 mm wafers or lab experiments done in even smaller (i.e. 100 mm) wafers.
The text in the article supports this:
> This is a commercial 300mm monolithic silicon photonics platform, meaning the technology is ready to scale today, rather than being limited to laboratory experiments.
IIRC from the time I was waiting for employment authorization, I wasn't allowed to do any charity work that could otherwise be a paid position, so be very careful with this charity idea.
