Teever (u/Teever) - Readit News

Teever commented on History LLMs: Models trained exclusively on pre-1913 texts github.com/DGoettlich/his... · Posted by u/iamwil

Teever · 20 hours ago

This is a neat idea. I've been wondering for a while now about using these kinds of models to compare architectures.

I'd love to see the output from different models trained on pre-1905 about special/general relativity ideas. It would be interesting to see what kind of evidence would persuade them of new kinds of science, or to see if you could have them 'prove' it be devising experiments and then giving them simulated data from the experiments to lead them along the correct sequence of steps to come to a novel (to them) conclusion.

Teever commented on Beginning January 2026, all ACM publications will be made open access dl.acm.org/openaccess... · Posted by u/Kerrick

rorytbyrne · a day ago

I disagree. We haven't chosen quantity over quality, we have decided that journals should not be the arbiters of quality. I think these new incentives are exactly what we want:

1. Journals want to publish lots of articles, so they are incentivised to provide a better publishing experience to authors (i.e. better tech, post-PDF science, etc) - Good.

2. Journals will stop prioritising quality, which means they will relinquish their "prestige" factor and potentially end the reign of glam-journals - Good.

3. Journals will stop prioritising quality, which means we can move to post-publication peer-review unimpeded - Good.

Teever · 21 hours ago

So what service to the journals provide to the people who are paying them?

Teever commented on TikTok unlawfully tracks shopping habits and use of dating apps? noyb.eu/en/tiktok-unlawfu... · Posted by u/doener

ehnto · 2 days ago

They don't have to collude, the third party advertisers that collate and provide shadow profiles do that work for them.

Teever · a day ago

That's the collusion that the OP is talking about.

It's just done through middlemen.

Teever commented on Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself? infosec.press/brunomiguel... · Posted by u/pabs3

1vuio0pswjnm7 · 2 days ago

"The web is unusable without a proper Adblock"

Unusable for the commenter perhaps, based on his choices, but not unusable in an absolute sense

For example, I have been using the web without an adblock for several decades.^1 I see no ads

Adblocking is only necessary when one uses a popular graphical web browser

When I use an HTTP generator and a TCP client then no "adblock" is necessary

When I use a text-only browser then no "adblock" is necessary

Websites that comprise "the web" are only one half of the ad delivery system

The other half is the client <--- user choice

Firefox is controlled and distribuited by an entity that advocates for a "healthy online advertising ecosystem" and sends search query data to an online advertising services company called Google in exchange for payment. Ex-Mozilla employees left to join Google and start another browser called "Chrome"

These browsers are designed to deliver advertising. That's why an "adblock" extension is needed

When one uses a client that is not controlled and distributed by a company that profits from advertising services, that is not designed to deliver advertising, then an "adblock" may not be needed. I also control DNS and use a local forward proxy

The web is "usable" with such clients. For example, I read all HN submissions using clients that do not deliver or display ads. I am submitting this comment without using a popular graphical web browser

1. Obviously there are some exceptions, e.g., online banking, e-commerce, etc. For me, this is a small minority of web usage

The web is usuable with a variety of clients, not only the ones designed to deliver ads

Teever · 2 days ago

Why do people make posts like this?

You know that your long-winded and patronizing response in no way is a solution to the problem that you claim it is for the audience you're talking about.

Why do you pawn off an obviously non-solution as a solution? What does this get you?

Teever commented on Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo blog.mozilla.org/en/mozil... · Posted by u/recvonline

glenstein · 3 days ago

Let's start with the acknowledgement of carouseling.

Teever · 3 days ago

I don't understand how what you're accusing me of pertains to anything I've written here today.

Teever commented on Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo blog.mozilla.org/en/mozil... · Posted by u/recvonline

glenstein · 3 days ago

>So if you have a billion in the bank,

I just want to note that this is what is sometimes called carouseling. Which is, instead of acknowledging the original accusation was not correct, which is what should be happening, this comment just proceeds right on to the next accusation.

What is happening, psychologically speaking, that is causing a mass of people to spew one confidently wrong accusation after another? They don't have an endowment (they do!). Well they're not investing it! (they are). Well they're not working on the browser! (they shipped 12 major releases with thousands of patches per release with everything from new tab grouping and stacking to improved gpu performance to security fixes)

This is like a dancing sickness or something.

Teever · 3 days ago

> "...if they had seen Mozilla making the financial moves that would have made it an independent and self-sufficient entity."

Does their endowment fund enable them to be an independent and self-sufficient entity?

In other words, Can they live off it in perpetuity?

Teever commented on Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo blog.mozilla.org/en/mozil... · Posted by u/recvonline

tectec · 3 days ago

What's the quote?

Teever · 3 days ago

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

I agree with the person you're responding to. Decades of funding and they have zero savings to show for it.

Though it's questionable as to how much big players like Google would have continued to fund Mozilla if they had seen Mozilla making the financial moves that would have made it an independent and self-sufficient entity.

Teever commented on Ford kills the All-Electric F-150 wired.com/story/ford-kill... · Posted by u/sacred-rat

JumpCrisscross · 4 days ago

> companies will not prioritize serviceability unless mandated by law

Ford is “expected to take about $19.5 billion in charges, mainly tied to its electric-vehicle business” [1].

If serviceability was the problem, that sounds like a solid incentive to get it right.

[1] https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/ford-takes-19-5-billion-c...

Teever · 4 days ago

I'm not sure quite sure how your comment relates to mine.

The way I see it is if there was sufficient enforcement of regulations around spare parts and serviceability then there's no way Ford could have stood up a factory that spat out a bunch of electric trucks without also producing a bunch of spare parts so the unreasonable delay to end users trying to repair their vehicles didn't occur.

I don't have to worry about getting a car battery or sparkplug because these things are standardized and mass produced. That's due to regulation.

The regulations just don't go far enough and the enforcement of them is obviously lax in 21st entury America

Teever commented on Ford kills the All-Electric F-150 wired.com/story/ford-kill... · Posted by u/sacred-rat

JumpCrisscross · 4 days ago

> They're difficult to repair. A regular F-150 is designed to be repaired; these things are designed like iPhones to be disposable

Is this due to the parts problem?

Teever · 4 days ago

Honestly sounds more like a regulation problem to me.

So many companies will not prioritize serviceability unless mandated by law.

Teever commented on If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes? english.elpais.com/techno... · Posted by u/PaulHoule

bko · 5 days ago

Exactly. This is such a silly argument. The article takes the argument "if a lot of jobs disappeared since they are now done effectively for free, what about tax revenue??"

It really misses the forrest from the trees. You're transported into a world in which efficiencies mean that much fewer people need to work, but somehow government services and entitlements are unchanged and we need to hit roughly the same percent federal tax receipts or ... what exactly?

Teever · 5 days ago

> You're transported into a world in which efficiencies mean that much fewer people need to work,

It's a matter of perspective. I'm pretty sure that from their perspective those people very much need to work because they need to pay taxes, rent, insurance, food etc...

What mechanism is going to ensure that the increased productivity is going to result in lower cost of living for these people such that they no longer require to spend so much of their life working to survive?