Though I suppose you could say he's lying, it's staged etc. In the same way that the religious attribute every good thing to their god and every bad thing to their devil.
Someone else may have said this but strictly speaking breakfast is something like a cone in a vector space, unless you want to explain to me how to eat negative eggs.
I think I will attempt to just eat the negative eggs because at least I recognize, and can define what both "negative" and "eggs" mean. Can't say the same for literally half the words in the OP's graph.
There’s a guy in overalls in a Brooklyn bistro who used to scramble them but that was very late-summer 2025 and you’ll get funny looks for asking about them.
Barycentric coordinates are the local coordinate system inside a simplex. A simplicial complex is what you get when you glue multiple simplices together along shared k-faces for k = 0 … n -- vertices (0-faces), edges (1-faces), triangles (2-faces), tetrahedra (3-faces), and higher-dimensional faces -- to form a larger state space.
It's not possible to have negative eggs, but you can apply the same machinery to many other things, like facial animation mesh blend shapes (Apple ARKit, Blender Blend Shapes and the FaceIt plugin, Unity SkinnedMeshRenderer, etc), where weights are often allowed to be overdriven >1 or even underdriven <0 for exaggerated or monstrous effects.
(Eric "Irk" Hedman designed and created the character animations and objects in The Sims 1, and as you can see is extremely skilled and delightful to work with! Hire him if you need professional high quality creative artwork and animation, and can pay him in bananas: https://erichedman.artstation.com/projects/8wJDgw )
Faceit: Facial Expressions And Performance Capture (Blender):
ARFaceAnchor.BlendShapeLocation:
Identifiers for specific facial features, for use with coefficients describing the relative movements of those features.
I was just referring to one of the early sentences saying breakfast is a vector space. If you allow arbitrarily many (say) eggs so that two eggs and one egg are different breakfasts, you get a cone inside R^d. If you normalise and consider the ingredients as fractions of a whole (so that 1 egg and 2 eggs are both represented by the 1.0 egg breakfast) you get this simplex structure and the coordinate system you mentioned. But that's still not a vector space as there are not inverses in general. At best it can be embedded in R^d.
Amazing that when ai "solves" an erdos problem by finding the solution in an existing paper it gets hundreds of points and comments, but when ai fails a more rigorous test designed by practitioners (i.e. a much better test of the claim that ai will soon do research level mathematics) it gets zip.
C is the only way to make a field out of pairs of reals. Also (or rather just another facet of the same phenomenon) we might be interested in polynomials with integer coefficients, but some of those will have non integral roots. And we might be interested in polynomials with rational coeffs but some will not have rational roots. Same with the reals but the buck stops with the complex numbers. They are definitely not accidental they are the natural (so to speak) completion of our number system. That they exist physically in some sense is "unreasonable effectiveness" territory.
In my experience, the so-called 1% are mostly just thinkers and researchers who have dedicated a lot more time from an earlier age to thinking and/or researching. There are a few geniuses out there but it's 1 in millions not in hundreds.
People like to, ahem, parrot this view, that we are not much more than parrots ourselves. But it's nonsense. There is something it is like to be me. I might be doing some things "on autopilot" but while I'm doing that I'm having dreams, nostalgia, dealing with suffering, and so on.
It’s a weird product of this hype cycle that inevitably involves denying the crazy power of the human brain - every second you are awake or asleep the brain is processing enormous amounts of information available to it without you even realizing it, and even when you abuse the crap out of the brain, or damage it, it still will adapt and keep working as long as it has energy.
No current ai technology could come close to what even the dumbest human brain does already.
A lot of that behind-the-scenes processing is keeping our meatbags alive, though, and is shared with a lot of other animals. Language and higher-order reasoning (that AI seems better and better at) has only evolved quite recently.
All your thoughts are and experiences are real and pretty unique in some ways. However, the circumstances are usually well-defined and expected (our life is generally very standardized), so the responses can be generalized successfully.
You can see it here as well -- discussions under similar topics often touch the same topics again and again, so you can predict what will be discussed when the next similar idea comes to the front page.
So what if we are quite predictable. That doesn't mean we are "trying" to predict the next word, or "trying" to be predictable, which is what llms are doing.
Over a large population, trends emerge. An LLM is not a member of the population, it is a replicator of trends in a population, not a population of souls but of sentences, a corpus.
International law does not apply to the leaders of the western hegemony. It is merely a tool used to oppress poor nations even further.
This fact only further proves one thing: the CIA is a terrorist organization and the state behind it is responsible for some of the most disgusting things this planet has ever seen.
Given the period of 2010-2012, the president at the time was Barack Obama. It does not seem realistic that people would accept opening a criminal case.
It is approaches like that which gives some hope to the future. War crimes are indeed something which should never be allowed or overlooked. Being a political leader doesn't make people immune to criticism, but rather should be someone held to a higher expectation.
Why does it matter if it was Obama or Bush in power? Sure, their politics influence the nation's foreign policies. But domestic partisan politics is largely irrelevant to the international partners. To the foreign nationals affected by it, you're just USA either way.
I mentioned just the other day, the problem with anti-intellectualism in the US and how it's fed by these sorts of egregious meddling by the administration. There are much less educated and affluent countries that are nowhere near as anti-science as the US. Yet unfortunately, the US exports it abroad too. I explicitly referred the same Pakistani case as an example of that. I'm all for Osama's elimination, but they jeopardized the entire humanity's future by misusing the vaccination program for it.
Despite a century of this nonsense (remember the radium girls?), neither political party cares enough to not pervert science in the interests of humanity. Smallpox and Polio were horrible diseases that caused untold miseries. Even the remote tribes of Pakistan knew their dangers well enough to participate in their elimination, until the US pulled off this dirty stunt. This is a deeply ingrained toxic culture that was reinforced by both parties over the decade. This should be a war crime irrespective of party allegiances.
>
Why does it matter if it was Obama or Bush in power?
If Bush was in Power, of course the accusation would have to made against Bush. So, of course, the accusation has to be made against the president that was in charge at the time. Dark skin color does not give him a "Get Out of Jail Free Card".
> Why does it matter if it was Obama or Bush in power?
How can you open a war crime case against a guy who already got a Peace Nobel Prize? And what war crime? Was there a war? Maybe some special military operation against Bin Laden.
Are you kidding? A way to smear Obama and portray him as disrespectful to non-whites? The only reason it’s not on Fox is that it reminds Americans that we’ve only had one victory in the War on Terror and the Republican Party contributed nothing positive.
reply