I'm getting lots of that "We detected unusual activity from your device or network" lately. I even went through my ISP to change my IP address, to no effect. If there really is "unusual activity", I wish they'd be a bit more specific.

> don't make a moralizing tweet about your principles only > to change them three hours later.

I have no inside scoop, but it sure looks like this was all pre-arranged. Altman made a better offer to Hegseth/ Trump (or offered some other "inducement"), so Hegseth found this way to weasel out of the contract with Anthropic. I don't see how this all would have transpired that quickly otherwise. And of course the fact that three days later OpenAI reportedly got the same contingencies on its contract that were the supposed reason for cancelling Anthropic's contract just looks wrong.

Entirely possible, though I think it might have been that Anthropic wanted extra guarantees outside of what was "lawful".

The stuff that Altman mentioned seemed to indicate that they'll support the US government as long as the US government is following the law, ignoring the "if the president does it it's not illegal" mentality that this administration appears to be taking.

I have no idea whether this is real, nor do I know how the concentration compares with that used in the study, but https://www.nanominerals.co.uk/products/the-health-factory-n... advertises it as a supplement (not as a medicine) for $40/ half liter.

(The ad also claims that the water their iron is suspended in is "energized", which makes the rest of the ad seem...questionable.)

It seems like you could also help direct the iron to the tumor with magnets. That seems too simple to be true, but I don't see why it wouldn't be.

FWIW (not much), around the time of that article, I reversed this: I used Arity Prolog for a morphological parsing program, with C calls for the bit fiddling (because I needed 64 bits, and the Prolog I was using only handled 16 bit strings).

You (we) may be able to extend that 30 years, one year for each calendar year. Because I'm told LLMs don't really do chained reasoning.

Disclaimer: I'm no expert on LLMs.

"Steam is liquid water droplets suspended in gas": You clearly did not work on steam-powered ships (or land-based steam power plants). I was Main Propulsion Assistant on a steam powered destroyer, and I can assure you that every effort is made to prevent droplets being suspended in the steam--because such droplets erode the blades on steam turbines. To that end, steam coming out of the stem drum (the upper part of the boiler) is run through superheaters, which raise the temperature of the incoming steam to evaporate any droplets. On our ship, the steam coming off the steam drum was a bit over 1200 psi and 600 some degrees Fahrenheit. After it goes through the superheaters, it's about the same pressure but 975 degrees.

And there's effectively no other gas in the steam, because dissolved air in the boiler's feedwater (particularly oxygen and carbon dioxide) has to be removed to prevent corrosion. To that end, water going into the boiler is first run through a deaerator, to remove any air that dissolved in the water as it came through the condensor.

> You clearly did not work on steam-powered ships (or land-based steam power plants

Well, that's true, I haven't, BUT still I went back and forth writing and deleting and rewriting and eventually deleting a whole digression about the special case of the jargon of steam power and how it uses “wet steam” (or “saturated steam”) for “steam” in the general use sense and “dry steam” for “water vapor” and “superheated steam” for dry steam created by heating wet steam away from contact with water, before deciding that was way too much, but, yeah, that's all true. (And, in details about the actual processes used, a lot more than I knew or would have gone into even if I had and had decided to keep the digression.)

> LLMs do not bring us closer to literate programming...

Without saying that I agree with the person you're responding to, and without claiming to really know what he was saying, I'll say what I think he was suggesting: That a human could do the literate part of literate programming, and the LLM could do the computing part. When (inevitably) the LLM doesn't write bug-free code snippets, the human revises the literate part, followed by the LLM revising the code part.

And of course there would be a version control part of this, too, wherein both the changes to the literate part and the changes to the code parts are there side-by-side, as documentation of how the program evolved.

To be technical: the term is phonemic, not phonetic. If we spelled phonetically, we'd have different symbols for the p in 'spin' and the p+h in 'pin'. Similarly for 'tick' and 'stick', and 'scale' and 'kale'. Native English speakers generally don't notice the differences, just like speakers of many oriental languages don't easily recognize the difference between English /l/ and /r/.

The Empire Strikes Back: scene where Chewy rescues C-3PO's parts from going into the recycling furnace.