Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | practicemaths's commentslogin

Maybe it isn't entirely a hardware issue. Maybe it is a software issue.

Where do persons get their software from? The environment. Observing how their parents/family/etc interact.

I think it's fair to say that communication matters and that communication & experiences will have an affect on peoples perceptions.


Depression is clearly a hardware issue. So also ADHD.


Depression very clearly is both a hardware issue and a software issue.

rolled 0.6 on hardware + 0.4 on software = 1.0

rolled 0.4 on hw + 0.6 on sw = 1.0

rolled 0 on both = 0.0 = maximum depression

rolled 1 on both = 2.0 = golden retriever with good owner


So riddle me this.

Hypothetical situation.

Take two dogs from the same litter.

Raise one with love and kindness. Play with it. Socialize with it.

Then take the other one and neglect and abuse the hell out of it.

Which dog do you think will show signs of depression?

Still think it's clearly just a hardware issue?


If you give all the love in the world to a schizophrenic, will he stop hallucinating?


We're looking at cause here not 'cure' or treatment.

Regardless schizophrenic individuals probably would do better with being treated with kindness, respect, compassion, and love than with derision and rejection. At least observational that has been my experience.


If you put an LLM on better hardware, will it stop hallucinating?


Anthropomorphization of LLMs is bad, but the reverse is worse. This is not psychology.

Although... has anyone tried quantizing schizophrenia?



depends on if you consider message passing (neuro-transmitters) in a graph NN as a hardware or software.


I'm not sure the distinction is meaningful at a high level. That which can be implemented in hardware can be emulated in software.

It may be significant with respect to a specific implementation. Do you mean to imply that the current crop of LLMs hallucinate only due to some flaw in the hardware they run on?


There is no software at all, it is all hardware. These are mere abstractions because the reality offers some guarantees which allows one to transfer one system onto another as if the underlying system didn't matter. Those guarantees allows one to speak of commonalities between one stuff and another.

ref : The Universe is Hostile to Computers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaZ_RSt0KP8


In that vein, there is no hardware either. It too is just an abstraction. However, that is not particularly meaningful. We draw lines around those abstractions and are able to compartmentalize them when discussing them.


I think we agree. If hardware was perfect, we wouldn't need ECC in RAMs. The reason to do this is we are poking the walls of compartments here.


Once someone's lost touch with reality, maybe not. In the earliest stages? Maybe, yeah:

> McFarlane believes that psychosis can be prevented with a range of surprisingly low-tech interventions, almost all of which are designed to reduce stress in the family of the young person who is starting to show symptoms.

> McFarlane cites research done at UCLA suggesting that certain kinds of family dynamics — families that don't communicate well, or are overly critical — can make things worse for a young person at risk of schizophrenia.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2014/10/20/3566400...


I can believe it. Not smoking is a great way to prevent certain types of lung cancer. However, if you have lung cancer, quitting smoking won't cure it.


This argument is genuinely horrible. Many times we have two “dogs”, same litter, same love and care, and one will be depressed and the other won’t be. Still think it’s just a software issue now hmmm?

Seriously, can you not just comprehend that it’s a complex issue and there is no singular source you can blame? If your kid committed suicide should I levy child abuse charges against you? And where does someone “learn” depression or schizophrenia anyway, especially if their parents are not acting the same way?


Hmmm:

"Maybe it isn't entirely a hardware issue."

Maybe read what I said first before going off.

"And where does someone “learn” depression or schizophrenia anyway, especially if their parents are not acting the same way?"

Man, I fear your family...


"Zuck, you can't be cool, you're too powerful and have done too many terrible things for the sake of money."

Sound's pretty gangsta to me. Isn't being a ruthless G cool?


Yeah, when you're a ruthless G. Not when you get home and start making up comebacks like George Costanza.

No one thinks scrounging around for money is going to label you a ruthless G.


The hustle don't stop Bro. Look at Snoop.


Nice try Zuck


Why would an Apple user ever want to do that? Obviously Apple knows better.


I don't think that's a typical opinion of Apple, like, at all.

It's by far the most sustained criticism the company has ever had with many other criticisms stemming from the same fundamental goal of upcharging and future sales


I think that was sarcasm...


I think you could put this much effort into finding evidence for virtually any other religion and come to the same conclusion.

I think it's the ultimate arrogance to think one's 'faith' happens to be the 'true' one.


As a Catholic Christian, I believe that the rays of God's truth shine through all religions to varying degrees, while the Church contains the fullness of the truth.

For example, Jews are the elders of our faith and Christianity is a continuation or fulfillment of Judaism. Jews, Muslims, and Christians all worship the God of Abraham and have some common beliefs.

Our Buddhist brothers and sisters say a lot of good things about detaching ourselves from worldly desires.

But at the end of the day, the Christian faith does proclaim Christ as the one and only Savior, while all other gods are false, and all other religions are inaccurate to various degrees. I do firmly believe this, and I believe that the cumulative evidence points in this direction.


Okay.


[flagged]


That is not what I stated.


"The blog site Dva Mayora said that Russian specialists are working on an alternative to Telegram, but that the Russian army's Main Communications Directorate has 'not shown any real interest' in getting such a system to Russian troops."

Yeah I can't say I'm surprised. Who needs comms when you are not expecting the bullet catchers to live?


In short, it's because of Epstein. Gate's is a filthy person and Buffett ain't cool with disgusting humans.


I hope it does not. We do not need more space debris in orbit or more risk to the station and crew.

Also if it lands okay then they are more likely to deduce and correct what the issues are for a possible future mission (though at this point I do not know the likelyhood that Starliner will get another chance)


It would only "blow up" on reentry, don’t think there’s much risk of an actual pressure vessel rupture or hypergolic explosion. So no space debris at least, just littering the ocean.


> I hope it does not. We do not need more space debris in orbit or more risk to the station and crew.

Even if such an explosion happened the debris wouldn't be around for long, stuff in LEO will fall back to earth quite quickly without stationkeeping.


Vehicles in LEO have taken near catastrophic strikes before. There's a better safety margin, but it's not reduced to zero.


The problematic thrusters are in the service module, which separates and burns up on reentry. So even if it lands OK, they won't learn anything new about the thruster problem by recovering the capsule.


If it were to blow up it would almost certainly be in the atmosphere due to entering at a bad angle or something. This would leave no debris in orbit and would not endanger the station or crew.


I'm not sure I follow.

I understand your point from a purely aesthetic standpoint.

However the second that a commonly needed setting is required you're going a layer "deeper" (it's not because before it was at the first level) and that aesthetic is broken. I doubt the iPad first crowd is going to really intuit that.


Genuine question. What's the practical difference between duel-booting and running Win-11 in VM?

I understand there's some performance differences, obviously. And VM requires perhaps a bit more setup and understanding.

However, is it reasonable to VM Win-11 to mediate SB concerns AND be able to have access to basic windows software and services since they're used a lot by industry and universities?

i.e. that is I just need access to Onedrive and MS office for the most part.


If its just basic apps, there is no reason to dual boot, a VM is less of a hassle.

If you want to run games, then dual-booting may be necessary if proton won’t work for the game you want to run in Linux.


GPU passthrough should work for a lot of cases. The games that are most likely to have problems are the ones with draconian drm or anti cheat. I avoid those, so protón tends to work for me anyway, so I don’t bother with windows.


I quick looked for what you need for that and

> Two graphics cards.

> Hardware that supports IOMMU.

> A monitor with two inputs or multiple monitors.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IOMMU-supporting_hardw...

Plus implied quite a bit of technical knowledge. I think dual-booting might be easier.


> Two graphics cards

This isn’t technically required, but does make things easier (search “single gpu passthrough). However, an integrated gpu for the host + separate gpu for guest for games is also an option and many modern AMD systems come with an integrated gpu.

> A monitor with two inputs or multiple monitors.

That’s not really necessary, you can use a hdmi splitter or just plug the active gpu in (I mean, if you’re dual booting you can only access one system at a time, so shouldn’t be an issue — you can plug an extension cable into your monitor so that and have a dedicated cable for each gpu, that way you don’t need to mess with plugs at the devices — I actually did this for a while to share my monitor with a games console)

Yes, it’s not the simplest thing to set up, but it does avoid the issues down the OP while still allowing gaming.

Personally, I never bothered because everything I want to play works on proton.


This is anecdotal but I use pci passthrough and drm hasn't yet been much of a problem except for older games.


It prevents Windows from running under it's own hypervisor, which it does to provide additional security (some configurations allow certain crypt operations to happen "outside" Windows).


It would work great if NVIDIA, AMD and Intel made high end consumer GPU's that could be shared between host and guest. So far we can only share Intel iGPU's - at least on paper, because I haven't managed to make it work.

... Or hack NVIDIA gpu's and potentially brick your 2000$ card...


In a time when cars are increasingly more connected than ever. More sensors and controls. Literally more software in cars today than ever before and they do this?

I suspect this a poor move on GM's part.


Par for the course. Have you driven a modern GM vehicle? Full of issues and borderline worthless once the warranty is up.

Really great company that the tax payer was forced to rescue.


The remaining legacy, domestic auto manufacturers are just kind of circling the drain. They all have stupid problems and largely seem to have ridden the coat tails of an older generation that vowed to buy American.

Anecdotally, but my Ford F-150 has so many software bugs it’s insane. It’s mechanically reliable, but the software is terrible.

* backup sensor don’t work about 10% of the time

* backup camera won’t engage about 1% of the time

* main screen will boot loop a few times before it fully turns on about 5% of the time

* heated and cooled seats seem to choose random setting when the car is remote started.

* lane centering system will crash if you try to take it through a turn that’s too tight. Have to turn the vehicle off, open the door to fix it.

* my trailer system won’t remember custom made trailers. I don’t really have a use for the system, but annoying none the less.

* auto power folding mirrors often get confused about their state when shutting down or starting the car up. Annoying, but easily fixed.

* my digital instrument panel will occasionally not turn on

* my digital instrument panel will occasional forget all of my custom settings. Different problem than above.

* Not really a bug, but the car has soooooooooo many popup notifications. There will literally be status messages that are overlaid by an almost identical, but different message. Thank you, F-150, I know that I plugged my cooler into the outlet in the bed. Please stop asking me if I want the generator on. The car is running, I want the generator on.

The physical vehicle is rock solid and I’m extremely happy with that. However, I just want to rip out all of the electronics and replace them with the magic that Kia/Hyundai built in their vehicle.

I largely get this impression anytime I step into an American vehicle. It feels like it was designed by a committee of out of touch executives.


If bugs weren’t so prevalent I’d think a squirrel’s been eating your wires haha. That’s a lot. My Honda has a few but I’m happy with it although I think someday it might kill me with these phantom lane corrections.


It’s a 3 year old vehicle. The backup sensor might be a wiring issue, but everything else is pure software issue.

Many of the “won’t turn on” things actually involve the component powering on (like the backlight turns on), but the digital components just don’t work.


Funny, my Chevrolet has most of the same issues and it drives me mad. The most infuriating one is where the infotainment comes on but is unresponsive to all input. You're stuck if you left the radio too loud or on a station you don't like.

One difference is it's also not mechanically too sound, to boot. The rear end needed a complete rebuild at 9k miles. Yes, nine thousand.


GM repaid all the debt given during the rescue, please don’t conflate a bail out with the companies poor decisions.


Not per Wikipedia[1]:"Through the Troubled Asset Relief Program the US Treasury invested a total $51 billion into the GM bankruptcy. Until December 10, 2013, the U. S. Treasury recovered $39 billion from selling its GM stake. The final direct cost to the Treasury of the GM bailout was $11-12 billion ($10.5 billion for General Motors and $1.5 billion for former GM financing GMAC, now known as Ally)."

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_Chapter_11_reor...


Did you miss the next sentence?

> A study by the Center for Automotive Research found that the GM bailout saved 1.2 million jobs and preserved $34.9 billion in tax revenue.

The whole point was to avoid the economic fallout of a GM collapse (and with it, yet another bank for the FDIC to deal with).


An automotive special interest group concluded that a $10.5B bailout for the automotive sector was a good thing!


I went and checked their funding, and only a quarter of it is from corporate interests. Governments actually fund them more.


As if those 1.2 million people would have just been twiddling their thumbs.


Why do you think it’s called “The Great Recession”?


Because a business cycle contraction occurred? If GM had been allowed to fail, other companies would have filled the gap in the market, and new businesses would have emerged, most likely generating even greater tax revenue over time. While there may have been some short-term thumb twiddling, the market would have eventually created new jobs elsewhere, jobs that would have been even more productive. There's a great opportunity cost to "saving" millions of unproductive jobs.


> Because a business cycle contraction occurred?

Yeah, like in 1929.

> If GM had been allowed to fail, other companies would have filled the gap

Which ones? A failure of GM would have hit Ford as well, because they share a lot of suppliers.


Not true at all; both the bondholders, who under the law were supposed to be senior, got screwed over, and certain non-union salaried employee pensions, were severely cut out of pension money by the PBGC.


If they had been making good decisions they would not have needed the bailout.


Nonsense. The government took a $10.5B loss when it converted the loan to equity. At one point the government owned 61% of GM. Wild.


The sensors and controls are made by companies like Bosch. GM doesn't need any expertise in this stuff, they just buy parts from companies that have it.


Not true. A few exceptional vendors like Bosch excepted, manufacturers are increasingly in-sourcing development away from the tier suppliers. It's a lot of work managing them to get quality outcomes and that system has repeatedly bitten manufacturers hard in the past decade. It also lengthens development timelines significantly and raises the cost of mid-development changes, when they actually need faster, more responsive development practices.

The issue with companies like GM is that while most people recognize what I've just said internally, there's a lot of conflict between traditional management processes/styles/cultures and the changes they need to make to adapt. These kinds of layoffs tend to result from the financial fragility they've built up. When some minor event puts clouds on the financial horizon, management only understands one tool to make changes and that's layoffs/pay cuts.


Have you ever written integration software?


Cutting 1000 software engineers doesn't necessarily mean they won't be needing the services of 1000 software engineers. They could just be moving to contract out the work instead of having more in-house staff.


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

Search: