The “what percentage do you think” vs “what percentage are” would be much better either as a scatterplot with a y=x line, or as a ratio (think/are) vs actual percent

Here’s a rough plot of the second thing. There’s a number of issues with it but I think it more clearly conveys the crucial information

The first plot might arguably be better but you couldn’t really see the way the ratio of overestimation decreased with more immigration as clearly as this one.

edit: Damn that came out way smaller than I expected. It’s readable if you zoom in

I’m fine with this. “We can’t succeed without breaking the law” isn’t much of an argument.

Do I think the current copyright laws around the world are fine? No, far from it.

But why do they merit an exception to the rules that will make them billions, but the rest of us can be prosecuted in severe and dramatic fashion for much less. Try letting the RIAA know you have a song you’ve downloaded on your PC that you didn’t pay for - tell them it’s for “research and training purposes”, just like AI uses stuff it didn’t pay for - and see what I mean by severe and dramatic.

It should not be one rule for the rich guys to get even richer and the rest of us can eat dirt.

Figure out how to fix the laws in a way that they’re fair for everyone, including figuring out a way to compensate the people whose IP you’ve been stealing.

Until then, deal with the same legal landscape as everyone else. Boo hoo

33 arty, wow. Still hitting logistics hard too, by the look.

Just need to get AI on that.

deleted by creator

damn

Among other issues that’s going to make it harder for them to do other stuff.

goes down with distance by an exponential factor
(1/x^3)

Umm… those two things are not equivalent. b^(-x) would be exponential, x^(-k) is inverse-power for whatever k

Its showing for me

It has been a pretty short trip from “Don’t be evil” to “The cutting edge of late stage capitalism”

took me a minute. Still waking up. The Bilbo Frodo age diff is 111-33, though so if this is Frodo at 50, Bilbo is older than 111 at the time of writing

Then delete and start over, or don’t use data you don’t have explicit permission to use. in the first place.

It’s like a thief saying “well, I already fenced most of the stuff so it’s too hard to give any of it back. So let’s just call it quits, eh?”

or bloody universal healthcare

I guess it depends on where you live. It’s not true of the whole world.

Waiting for 100% oral exams to make a comeback.

The headline’s confusing. If a losing bet is backfiring, does that mean it’s now a winning bet?

heh, all of them (plus several others) were on my list of “never buy from them” list a decade ago. Never had any reason to reconsider

Well, that’s something I hadn’t seen before.

It’s not the word “lighter” that’s the issue, it’s the word “less”. If I say something weighs 80% less, … you know how much that is. 100% less, it weighs even less – nothing at all. 500% less (i.e. 5 times less), suddenly it weighs more?

I’ve been saying for about 15 years now – you’d have to be a masochist to buy HP printers. Why do people keep enabling these shits? You just encourage them to be even worse. Don’t stand for even a little of their bullshit and they will change or die. You make a noose for your own neck.

Neither, though I do watch a bit of Matt Parker on youtube, so it’s a decent guess.

“one fifth the mass” is not the same thing as “five times lighter”

Consider something that weighs half as much. It’s 50% lighter … 0.5 times lighter. Something that weighs 0.2 times as much has 20% of the weight, and is 80% lighter. If it weighed 1% as much, it would be 99% lighter (0.99 times lighter). If it was 100% lighter … it would weigh nothing. Five times lighter would be -4 times the original mass.

We already have accurate and precise ways to describe less mass (albeit leaving aside for the moment the distinction between mass and weight). It’s no harder to say “one fifth” than “five times”, but only one is correctly describing what is going on.