Not really, WhatsApp is used in Europe, Middle East and India. Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, South Korea are on Line. China Weibo I think. Even in the West the market is fragmented with Signal, Telegram, Facebook Messenger, Instagram, Discord, etc.
> the model used and the approach is extremely simplistic
Seems like a constant in doomsday "science": making a model that bear ressemblance to reality as much as SimCity does, run it to get the expected conclusion, then extrapolate and conclude with newsworthy title that X or Y is true in reality.
>then extrapolate and conclude with newsworthy title that X or Y is true in reality.
It's worth noting that this portion is generally done by science reporters rather than the scientists. It's quite often the case that alarmist articles refer to research with much more measured and less sweeping claims.
No they aren’t in this sense. I’m really not sure what you are attempting to convey here, maybe you’re being defensive for reasons unrelated to this topic, but your links aren’t talking about doing ultrasimplistic studies that don’t properly model the problem and treating results as fact. They mean simplicity in the Occams Razor meaning. Occams Razor is about the simplest solution being the most likely (e.g. don’t invent a ton of conclusions) and in fact is a philosophical argument for the existence of god.
Please don’t condescend people and definitely don’t go around arguing that science holds unrealistic simplicity as a core tenant.
The comment I replied to seemed to make the following reasoning: "a lot of junk science uses oversimplified models; this work also uses an oversimplified model; therefore, this work is also junk science".
And my intention was to point out that this kind of reasoning is invalid, because simplification is an important aspect of the scientific process.
My theory is that in a really stressful situation the mind hyperfocuses and "processes more frames per second" to react quicker. Just like with movies this mean that replayed at normal speed the movie serms very slow, hence the long timespan memory.
> Not everyone is interested in a humongous editor with a steep learning
Then why using a TUI editor at all? Each time nano was opened because of some default settings, I saw this whole bottom bar with shortcuts. It sure doesn't seems to be easy to learn either.
I don’t understand why so many people in these comments are claiming text editors are “hard” to learn.
Software engineers that went to college have taken Calculus, Physics, and other advanced courses that can be very hard for many to learn.
The reality is that memorizing a few keyboard shortcuts is not in fact hard. It’s something that can take time, and you might not like the shortcuts, but it’s not hard.
If you want to use powerful tools, you’re going to have to learn how to use them. There’s no way around this.
I don't get this either. You watch a skilled tradesman work and he'll use all manner of tricks he's learnt over the years. His tools will do most of the work, he just gently guides them in the right direction. Then I'll see developers not even using tab completion in a shell. It's almost like tooling has to shout at them (like underlining errors etc) out of the box before they'll interact with it. It's so strange.
You’re in the wrong thread. Normal folks outnumber developers 100 to 1.
Not to mention, some of that dev group prefer that their small editor have the same keybindings as their full dev environment and entire OS for that matter. No mode switching needed.
Then don't try to put discredit to the saying of an insider. GP is 100% right. I've been back after about ~5 years living abroad and the country is in an astonishing decline on every plan (educational, moral, economical, political, diplomatic, security, judicial, medical, etc. the list goes one). And most of it is stemming from the policies enforced in the last decades.
> Then don't try to put discredit to the saying of an insider.
The GP in question is a generic ramble about distaste for current government. You can apply that for each and every country - there's not one where citizens are happy with their leaders. And if this flies for 'insider knowledge' in France you really are f**d and, its not because of the government.
>But I agree said rambling remains quite generic nonetheless.
That's what makes it sound like noise. If you took "france" out of the sentence I wouldn't be able to tell which country this is talking about. US, Canada, UK, China, Japan? It's like the fortune reading of government criticism.
The current président de la République managed to trigger protests and strikes that are only rivaled by the '86/87 student riots. The yellow vest protest almost had the potential to turn into another May '68 style event. It almost always begins with police killing a French citizen of Algerian origin or by messing up with the fuel prices. Hollande was a total disaster and Sarkozy is a 2x convict by now, no need to say more.
That wasn’t my point and doesn’t change anything about GP’s own merits or lack thereof.
I was actually trying to show it does have some merit by pointing out that, despite being generic, said ramble targets all the governments we’ve had over the last 20 years, and thus shouldn’t be so easily dismissed.
The conclusion was me playing nice by finding some common ground with the person I was replying to.
It wasn't the saying of an insider, it was empty rhetoric based on the perception of an insider, there's a big difference.
I'm sure you perceive the decline, and you were so kind to mention in which fields. Let's take an example, i.e. economy and security. Immigration and illegal immigrants are often related to immigration, in public discourse.
I'm sure the government in the last 20 years has done something about it (despite me not knowing France): either it tried to tighten it, or to make it happen more smoothly, or to integrate the immgrants, or to convince them to go back, or...
Now, I'm also pretty confident there's a sizable percentage of people that think that immigration is not a security problem nor an economic problem, but it's casted as such by the right; all these measures were a waste of time and money, which could have been used to improve other stuff in the public interest.
There's a decent amount of people that believe immigration should be helped and increased, and the efforts in controlling it have been wrong, and bad, and against the public interest.
There's people, likely on the right, thinking that there's way too many immigrants, and the previous government didn't do enough to address this; it is in the national interest to reduce immigrants, make sure they are all working, but without hijacking the possibilities for French citizens.
Did I guess correctly? Who is The People, and what is the correct National Interest now? Does it by any chance align with your views on immigration (which might or might not align with those of the OP, btw - we can't say much about those since there was no content)?
There're a bunch of corrupted inviduals with no counter power to keep them in check. No decisions are made for the benefit of the French people since a long time, every law passed is either to augment their power, rise taxes (already world top 1 or 2 depending on the year) or to the benefit their friends owning private companies. Of course technology freedom will suffer from this as well.
> ... or to the benefit their friends owning private companies.
Yup this one in France is really a big problem. The public sector spendings officially represents something like 58.1% of the french GDP (official "Insee" numbers from 2023, for 2022)... France is not far from a planned economy and, unsurprisingly, it's a particularly harsh environment for real small private SMEs (i.e. those without friends at the state) and for entrepreneurs, for they're getting trounced by taxes.
And that gigantic state (percentage wise of the GDP, not on the world stage) still cannot prevent days of riots and drug-dealers from ruling the streets (like in the city of Marseille).
A deeply corrupt state where public servants are planted so that taxes can grow and, in return, the people don't even get safe streets.
But all is fine and well for these corrupt politicians because soon they'll be able to prevent comments such as yours or mine from being read by anyone.
Marseille's worst neighborhoods are really chill compared to the bad parts of any American city.
The streets are pretty safe.
Your comment is kinda ridiculous, stop watching TV.
Yeah there are lot of taxes, but those taxes come in handy when you can get 2 years of unemployment benefits when starting a company. Or when you know, get a cancer that would cost a few millions to treat.
There are many, many, many worse cities in the US. That's a homicide rate of 3.75/100'000, which is lower than the US average of 4.9/100'000 : most US cities have worse homicide rates than Marseille. If Marseille was a US city, it would be the 3rd or 4th city with a population over 1 million with the lowest homicide rate.
My girlfriend had a poorly aimed egg thrown at her late at night in Marseille on a kebab run for wearing a short skirt in a Muslim neighborhood. Seems pretty rough to me!
France is not a planned economy in the Soviet Union style, and we are in a privatisation trend. But the state still has a huge role in the economy and a history of interventionism in the private sector. More than most European countries.
I have no knowledge of the worst American cities, but saying that Marseille's worst neighborhoods are "chill" and "The streets are pretty safe" is pure madness.
This. In Spain, the Marseille's counterpark (shitty urban black hole) would be the 3000 viviendas (3000 homes) in Seville, or maybe some barrack based 'hood in Madrid far in the downtown.
And even with that, I would be safer if I kept a low profile with my head down and by not getting into troubles and by avoiding some taverns. Try that at the worst places of any big city in the US.
France has always been pretty bad at running an economy.
Ofcourse for the rest of Europe this is a good thing- French military ambitions have been consistently sabotaged by this oversight. Good military, brilliant engineers and capable bureaucrats but terrible merchants.
And wars are won on the stock market.
For one thing, France is and remains one of the richest countries in the world. For a second thing, I seem to remember that France is currently outperforming both Germany and the UK (I read this in both German and British newspapers, but I don't remember the details).
Is it perfect? Far from it. But French bashing feels pretty counter-productive.
Almost no part of the world was free from European colonialism. France was one of the largest colonial powers. If England lost to France maybe India would be speaking French instead of English now.
>No decisions are made for the benefit of the French people since a long time, every law passed is either to augment their power, rise taxes or to the benefit their friends owning private companies.
Same in Germany as well. The country long stopped caring for its people and mainly operates as a vehicle for german industrial interests to make money.
>There're a bunch of corrupted inviduals with no counter power to keep them in check.
The guillotine has proven this to be incorect. Separating their heads from their bodies helps keep rulers unable to perform further acts of corruption.
Well if majority votes for them, it's important to respect the choice of the voters, even if you don't like their choice because you have other interests that you want to defend.
The opposition in France are far from being angels, it's very similar to Democrats vs Republican situation in France (except Gauche vs Droite).
Not only that, it's common to have a ballot that only presents a choice between two monsters. It's your fault if you vote for one and it's your fault if you stay home. Maybe the problem is systemic?
Checks and balances that get eroded during populist waves, stay that way when the monster comes.
That errors out when a library is missing, Soni figure out where to get it, how to install it and rerun configure, just to see something else is missing. And that then leads to a version conflict and then I mess.... only works well for projects with few dependencies and especially no uncommon dependencies.
So quite similar to the US where oligarchs (oups, billionaires) are invited at the White House and companies provide algorithmic censorship favoring a particular political camp (obvious with Twitter before its recent purchase, YouTube actions against public free discourse on covid, Google removing pages related to a certain laptop, etc.)
In America "white" is not a colour, Italian or Arabs with dark skin are also "white", unless they are from south America, then they are latinos. The only true meaning of white in the US is "not black", so those things working in Japan is not a valid counter point.
It's true that "white" is not a skin color, but also let me point out that people with lighter skin tones than what is commonly called "white people" are hilariously considered "people of color".
Skin "color" is some diffuse concept that doesn't really have much to do with the actual color spectrum and, in many cases, not even physical features. The extremes are easy to tell, but there's a whole world in between with some pretty arbitrary definitions.
I can assure you Middle Eastern doesn’t quite qualify as White in the racist parts of the country. Even if that’s what the US Census Bureau would have you select.
He's trying to generate a post-hoc justification for an inaccurate statement, there's nothing more to it than that. Still, self-identification matters and I wanted to see if he'd cross the Rubicon and try to force the white identity on groups that don't want it.
Bearing in mind his linchpin example - Arabs - are neither perceived as nor self-identify as white [1], it's bizarre to suggest that it follows that the Japanese, a separate case anyway, must also be white.
Add to that his conflation of ethnicity with race [2], and it might be the single most stupid comment I've ever seen on HN. Just say "OP meant to say black", there's no need to construct an alternate reality in which non-white and black are synonyms.
"many in the MENA community do not share the same lived experience as White people with European ancestry, do not identify as White, and are not perceived as White by others."
> In the face of current hype around LLMs and 'fear of AI', calling a Random Forest Classifier 'AI' is a bit... far
Just because the state of art evolved doesn't mean we have to erase history of the field. This is a ML algorithm so calling it AI is perfectly in line.
The fear you mention is built on the lack of understanding of what ML is. Showing that some AI has "dumb" yet useful implementations can help show the limits of this category of technology.
Lol the wikipedia article of RFs is literally quoted to be "Part of a series on Machine learning and data mining" yet you have MLDevSecBullshitOPs-type experts here schooling you on what consists AI or not.
