Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | m3kw9's comments login

Problem is that given the same prompt “cat running” there is a chance the exact photo could be generated again.

Maybe the reserve will buy wBtc that is on a L2 chain.

Apple: “It seems letting other watch devices have access to all the capabilities the Apple Watch has will commodize it. But it will make them happy. Let’s do it anyways, our shareholder shouldn’t mind us allowing our watch to get cannabalized”.

It’s likely a priority issue. They have limited software resources but have so many products to support and develop, they will like any company weight what fits their future roadmap and strategy. Saying they purposely hobble watch devs isn’t really true

Doing that across billions of streams a day will cost big computer costs to encode it as they are dynamic ads

This article is crazy engineering work

Got use that LLM to bridge to the Hawk tuah coin

It is only the 3rd month of a 4 year term. Couple that with Elons move fast and break sht, you got some really risky stuff happening.

Ok but then the theory of black holes are wrong because this isn’t dense at all.

Black holes aren't really infinitely dense. The matter isn't concentrated at the centre, its spread out over the event horizon. As i understand the theory, they effectively suggest you could glue another universe onto the event horizon of a black hole. From the outside that is indistinguishable from 'just a black hole'.

Only the infinitesimally small singularity that is in the future of all objects inside the event horizon is supposed to be very dense. The space inside the event horizon is supposed to be normal-ish

If such a singularity exists at all. The thing we "observe" about black holes is the event horizon. It could be that space inside a black hole is just regular space.

Yep! Generally speaking singularities only appear because the math is deficient in some way. Other areas of physics successfully got rid of unphysical singularities by employing better math, it's just that we don't know how to fix this aspect of general relativity (maybe quantum gravity will?)

Black holes need not be dense. The black hole at the centre of galaxy M87 has the density of air in our atmosphere. The larger the black hole, the less dense it is. So that alone doesn't preclude us existing inside of one.

That’s news to me, I was taught that the mass collapses into it self it creates more gravity and more matter gets sucked in because the mass is so dense. So at which point does it become less dense?

Keep in mind that my own knowledge of physics is very rusty, so some of this is definitely making bad assumptions.

The density in the singularity (centre) of the black hole is in theory infinite. But the event horizon (the part where light no longer escapes) is not the singularity, it's simply where the gravity becomes so strong that light can't escape.

Think of it as the sun vs the planets - we're not in the sun, but we still feel its effects. The density of the solar system isn't the same as the density of the sun. This is bad analogy because the same mathematics/physics doesn't apply, but it should help you get the general picture based on your original assumption.

In general, the heavier the black hole, the less dense it is when measured from the event horizon. So in theory, it's possible to have a black hole so heavy that the event horizon contains the entire universe. In fact, the known universe is heavy enough to be a black hole 3 times the known radius of the universe. But as we know from stars that turn into black holes, just because something is heavy enough to be a black hole, doesn't mean it is one yet.


As long as it’s dense enough that light can’t escape, it’s a black hole. You can achieve that with extreme density or huge volumes of mass. The more massive an object, the less dense it needs to be to be a black hole.

An entire universe crammed inside the event horizon seems pretty dense to me! Makes you wonder how much matter would be in the parent universe.

Can’t fool the patent inspectors if they don’t name it like that

There's probably a patent for: "Just double-checking before answering to the user".

I wish somebody would release an AI that did it.

Is it not what "Reason" or "Thinking" features are for? Sort of...

Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: