This feels... excessive. If you wanna regulate AI then regulate AI. This is what Congress is for no? Just seems like a weird way to go about this.

but wrt. the points of the law suite it is already regulated, that is why there is a law suite

think about it, it would be absurd if you had to redefine deceptive, misleading or negligent business practices for every single kind of product anew.

So instead they define it once, in a generic way. But companies tend to try to knowingly stretch and often outright breach this generic definitions in hope to lawyer bs themself out of it. And sadly they do too often succeed to at least avoid keeping to the law during the initial marked capture :(. This is a huge problem, but not suing and nit picking regulating everything again and again and again for each new kind of product would make this problem _way_ worse.

This doesn't mean that regulations which "clarify" what this means for a specific field/product would not be desirable. They are a very desired improvement IMHO. But not because companies would then keep to the law, they make more money by ignoring it, but to cut down cost/time when suing for a breach ...

Or to put it differently, most countries do require companies to act non-negligent _as most fundamental baseline_ (through many different laws/regulations), if you very clearly do act negligent or even malicious/deceptive then you can't complain if they sue.

Ideally, yes. Currently Congress is just a rubber stamp for the president who has been suitably bribed into being an AI booster

Regulation is forward looking.

How do you hold people accountable for reckless behavior in the past?

But if the closed-source models can do this without the additional effort, that's a significant gap, no?

See that's the thing, they can't. Every model needs hand holding and guidance.

some require less hand-holding than others though

No one is trying to argue that OS models are better than Opus 4.7. It's simply that they're good enough and cheaper.

The point is that the price gap is so much larger than the capability gap, that even with the extra compute needed to make up for the lack of capability, you can still come out ahead in terms of amortized $/work done.

Is it really when they are hundreds of times more expensive?

That is the 3-6 month sota-open gap people talk about, a time-window that continues to move as new models are released on both sides.

Do you know what economic trade offs are?

Both implicit and explicit..?

At least Quebec actually does have a distinct nation/culture/ethnicity/language.

Yeah I'm really not sure why everyone is shitting on it so hard, I mean it is a cool interactive experience. I understand that present-day Opera has some serious problems, sold to a Chinese company, people feel like it's a separate thing from old Opera, that it's lost its soul, all very fair. But we should be able to evaluate this experience as a separate thing, and it's pretty slick!

I am also surprised it's so low (the number who haven't read). I would have expected 3 in 5 or even 4 in 5 americans to have not read a single book in 2025. I wonder if these stats include "tried to finish a book (and failed)" rather than actual completion stats.

Maybe it's 1 readers, 2 honest people, and 2 people who preferred to lie than confess they didn't read a single book.

Am I missing something? If the algorithm is interrupted, the list will not be sorted. How exactly does it fit the criteria of an anytime algo?

An anytime algorithm monotonically improves some evaluation metric. For a sort, the evaluation metric is usually the number of inversions in the list. At completion, there will be zero inversions. If at time 0 there are N inversions, then at time 0 < t < completion time there will be ≤ N inversions; that is, the list is "more sorted" than it was before. As the various examples about games and animation elsewhere in the comments show, this can be interpreted as "somewhat smoothly moving towards sorted over time," which is an (occasionally) ((rarely)) useful property.

Okay, but it gives you a mostly good answer! Unlike many other sorts where if you interrupt it before the last step, you get total nonsense.

It's basically asymptotically approacting the correct (sorted) list instead of shuffling the list in weird ways until it's all magically correct in the end.

> Unlike many other sorts where if you interrupt it before the last step, you get total nonsense.

which ones you have in mind? and doesn't "nonsense" depend on scoring criteria?

selection sort would give you sorted beginning, cocktail shaker would have sorted both ends

quick sort would give vast ranges separation ("small values on one side, big on the other"), and block-merge algorithms create sorted subarrays

in my view those qualities are much more useful for partial state than "number of pairs of elements out of order" metric which smells of CS-complexity talk

Wrong post.

Can you explain how you patched the iOS IG app? Seems massively useful if it's not too much of a pain. Please share!

Is it just me or is the total amount of funding at the Sovereign Tech fund (https://www.sovereign.tech/faq) hilariously small? 11.5 mil eur right now? 17 mil next year? Better than nothing of course, but...

yes, though perhaps stating the obvious: it depends what they do with it.

Ladybird currently has 8 full-time devs [1] and is making impressive progress on delivering a browser from scratch. Wise investment in small, focused, capable teams can go a long way if they're not chasing VC-driven Unicorn status (or in stasis as a Google anti-trust diversion).

That's not challenging your point though: in the face of competing budgets at US tech giants, EUR17Mn still barely registers above noise level. Nevertheless, it's a start. We can only hope it grows and doesn't get shut down by some political lobbying by the aforementioned US behemoths. A modest budget might actually help there - not yet big enough to cause concern to incumbents.

[1]: https://ladybird.org/

What is the point of a new browser engine? What will be the advantage over WebKit/Blink/Gecko?

Sure it “isn’t monetized”, but nothing stops you from making non-monetized forks of chromium or Firefox. And nothing stops company from forking Ladybird and monetizing it, either.

Hopefully new independent voice in the questions of platform features, development and future.

Google could do pretty much anything with the platform if it were not for Apple and iOS. And that's a big if because if they align on something it will get to the platform.

Firefox unfortunately seems to be infected by Silicon Valley people that seem to be quite obedient to the status quo.

Ladybird is at least developed by people from all around the world.

Bit of a weird choice to draw a decision boundary for a clustering algorithm...

How so? Drawing decision boundary is a pretty common visualization technique for understanding how an algorithm partitions a data space.