Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jepj57's commentslogin

Open standards, private software is the way to go. It makes sense for any entity to control their own destiny.


Beautiful story. One Christmas Eve I ( with my kids in the car) picked up a hitchiker. His name was Christian, and he was headed to our church. I went out of my way, and dropped him off in the parking lot. I felt blessed to have helped him.


Looks like much ado about nothing. This was already proposed and shot down on 2020, and Justice Scalia has already commented in a 2013 case that this is not a good idea.

Call your Congress critters and let them know how you feel. This is just institutional creep that, like an invasive plant, needs to be pruned back from time to time.


The national security justification is that we need expertise building/designing drones. We won't get that if we allow China to out-compete domestic manufacturers.


What about a copyright on websites stating anyone using your site for training would be giving the owner of the site an eternal non-revocable license to the model, and must provide a copy of the model upon request? At least then there would be SOME benefit.


Contract law doesn’t work that way.


Now apply that thinking to human-based neural nets...


It's because we are the United STATES of America.


A popular vote was seriously considered while drafting the Constitution for these United STATES. The founders didn’t seem to think it was a contradiction. They went with the current solution because it’s hard to count a slave as 3/5ths of a person with a national popular vote.


That's silly, most modern democracies are organized federally and don't have this issue.


Most modern democracies -- that's correct. Only the USA is organized this way.

One might consider that later democracies learned from some of our mistakes.



If only people weren't forced to sign non-compete agreements... seriously, you don't like em, don't sign em.


The freedom not to sign is not the same as the liberty to pass up an opportunity for survival. Your snippy quip just makes you sound like an ignorant fool who can’t defend their position, let alone coherently argue against others.


If I walk across the desert and find a house on an oasis and the owner offers me water on the condition that I first put a chain on my ankle that is tethered to the property, do I really have the option to say no?


Yes and to stay within your metaphor you can just go to the house next door and get water without being chained up


What if all the houses are following the “standard industry practice” of chaining anyone who asks for water? What if refusing to follow this practice means that you can’t obtain funding to build a house?


I'd say it's feedback/reward loop plus small, quick to achieve, progressive goal setting.


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

Search: