timorl @timorl@qoto.org

@robryk It's one person, but the class in question is being run by a mother/daughter pair of teachers, and the mail is signed by both of them. Dunno why they write singular...

In an official mail from the school I just got:

Gleichzeitig heiratet mein Sohn / Bruder.

@GeoffWozniak The author might be a good lawyer, but probably doesn't know much about AI. Unless Microsoft invented a completely new paradigm, Copilot uses standard ML techniques, and with them there is simply no way of preserving the licences attached to the learned code. For a while I've been wondering whether training the system on batches of software with licenses compatible with a specific one, but even MIT requires preserving an authorship statement, so almost no lincences are compatible in this sense.

Other than that, good article.

@PsyChuan This sounds like a misunderstanding to me. In tge UK "working class" is afaik much more of a cultural marker, so the take is complete gibberish from a marxist/economic point of view, but not the cultural one.

And yeah, this almost surely has disastrous consequences for actual class consciousness.

@urusan It's called anosmia and it's surprizingly common.

@tripu I cannot imagine a future in which doing this wouldn't end up as "fake rigor". There are too many degrees of freedom in investigating such things and controlling for other variables is never complete.

That being said, while I'm very skeptical about many applications of QALY, there are clearly areas in which they could be used more for specific interventions.

@freemo I know it's not that simple, otherwise firing all workers would be a winning strategy. :D My point was that the stock market reacts to layoffs with stock rises, presumably based on something like the reasoning I described above. I only know about the reasoning because someone tried explaining to me why companies do that and why it apparently works.

Probably if they were too obvious about the attempt it would fail, but I'm not sure -- the short term gains might be enough for a short term change in stock price, which is all you want when you want to sell a lot of stocks.

@cwebber

@freemo Huh, I would have thought this was referring to a different mechanism -- laying off people is one of the easiest ways of lowering operational costs, which results in the company valuation growing, which results in stocks' price growing. So the relation I would expect would be reverse to what you are describing -- not "I have to lay off people, because I won't be able to afford paying them after selling the stocks" (which I agree makes no sense), but "if I lay off people now, the stocks' price will grow, so I won't have to sell as much stock to afford Twitter".

Obviously rather than "grow" I would expect "fall less", since announcing that you'll have to sell lots of stock will most likely impact the price much more.
@cwebber

@robryk I believe you missed the joke, it's not "discontinuous transition", but "my clothes would get wet". :P @imyxh