Yo! Apparently not enough em-dashes or bullet points.

Just because people get murdered doesn't mean that laws against murder are useless. Although I don't have any evidence of that.

Murder can be verified and caught in many ways. It is more like the 1969 Bathroom Singing Prohibition Act.

I think this new guideline is nothing like the Bathroom Singing Prohibition Act, because that law doesn't seem to really exist: https://www.grunge.com/1710070/is-pennsylvania-strange-batht...

It is definitely like it because it can't be enforced. No one can tell if your singing in your private bathroom so a law covering that makes no sense.

AI generated comments can also be verified and caught in many ways. I'd guess that it's statistically more likely for a murder to be resolved than a random AI comment to be detected but I'm not actually sure. There are a lot of sloppy murderers (since it's rare for an individual to have _practice_ at it) - but there are also a lot of sloppy LLMs.

Well the laws against murders also often have punishments/repercussions associated with them. HN guidelines? Not so much

>> that Google spends >$1B/year to develop.

Isn't this downright crazy when you think about it? Seems like we need to start from scratch. Create a minimal bytecode (like webasm or whatever) that writes to a virtual frame-buffer of sorts, and has keyboard/mouse inputs. Then content is distributed as compiled byte-code apps. All the fancy stuff you want in your app has to be provided by the app creator, and not essentially using the browser as a library.

Thanks for doing this. I really like the idea of open/transparent government.

How in the world does "int argc" not make the list? But good to know that "frit flies" does.

>How much precedence is there for machines or tools getting an author credit in research?

For a datum of one, the mathematician Doron Zeilberger give credit to his computer Shalosh B. Ekhad on select papers.

https://medium.com/@miodragpetkovic_24196/the-computer-a-mys...

https://sites.math.rutgers.edu/~zeilberg/akherim/EkhadCredit...

https://sites.math.rutgers.edu/~zeilberg/pj.html

Interesting (and an interesting name for the computer too), thanks!

>the shapes we see were apparently at the quantum scale

I thought that was sound waves?

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=baryon+acoustic+oscillations&t=ffa...

...unless you are thinking about something else?

I don't really know, to be honest. Everything I know about it is from pop-sci sources.

>you probably aren't going to get any advantage by trying to build one in Earth orbit.

People want to put a radio telescope on the far side of the moon, so that it doesn't have interference from terrestrial RF sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Crater_Radio_Telescope

...and your spatial resolution is proportional to the size of your telescope. So you could have really high resolution if you speckled your interferometric telescope array units around L1, L2, L4, and L5.

It seems like this is saying that of the people who choose to rent a house, they pay less per month in housing costs than those people who choose to buy a house. So there isn't an accounting for the difference in houses that people want to rent vs. those who want to buy. What I think the headline is implying is that you can rent a comparable house (size, location, upkeep, etc.) for considerably less than owning that same house. Which I don't think is what the data is saying.

https://www.lendingtree.com/home/mortgage/comparing-rent-vs-...