> The first caliper with a secondary scale, which contributed extra precision, was invented in 1631 by the French mathematician Pierre Vernier (1580–1637).[1] Its use was described in detail in English in Navigatio Britannica (1750) by mathematician and historian John Barrow.[2] While calipers are the most typical use of vernier scales today, they were originally developed for angle-measuring instruments such as astronomical quadrants.
So it would have been a contemporaneous technique with that initial angle measurement, and the use of a Vernier scale for angular measurements would have itself been common.
I've known someone like that too, and in her case it's because she never had anything when she was a kid. So she can take agonizingly long to let go of anything even if it's obviously ruined or worthless because it might be useful in some undefined way in the future.
Yeah I came here to post this. This is the other thing we're going to see. And it doesn't have to be perfect to orchestrate people, it just has to be mediocre or better and it will be better than 50% of humans.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't forcing you to divulge your encryption password compelled speech? So the police can crack my phone but they can't force me to tell them my PIN.
Yes, you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself, but Microsoft is under no such obligation when served a warrant because of third party doctrine. Microsoft holding bitlocker recovery keys is considered you voluntarily giving the information to a third party, so the warrant isn't compelling you to do anything, so not a rights violation.
But, the 5th amendment is also why its important to not rely on biometrics. Generally (there are some gray areas) in the US you cannot be compelled to give up your password, but biometrics are viewed as physical evidence and not protected by the 5th.
Warrants are a mechanism by which speech is legally compelled.
The 5th Amendment gives you the right to refuse speech that might implicate you in a crime. It doesn’t protect Microsoft from being compelled to provide information that may implicate one of its customers in a crime.
Indeed. Third Party Doctrine has undermined 4th/5th Amendment protections due to the hair brained power grab that was "if you share info with a third party as art of the only way of doing business, you waive 4th Amendment protections. I ironically, Boomers basically knee-capped Constitutional protections for the very data most critically in need of protection in a network state.
Only fix is apparently waiting until enough for to cram through an Amendment/set a precedent to fix it.
Well, SCOTUS has ummed and erred over several cases about whether to extend the 4th Amend to third party data in some scenarios. IIRC there is an online email case working up through 9th Cir right now?
One of the reasons giving for (usually) now requiring a warrant to open your phone they grab from you is because of the amount of third-party data you can access through it, although IIRC they framed is a regular 4th Amend issue by saying if you had a security camera inside your house the police would be bypassing the warrant requirement by seeing directly into your abode.
They can't force you to tell them your PIN in some countries, but they can try all PINs, and they can search your desk drawer to find the post-it where you wrote your PIN.
Good PINs are ones you're not allowed to brute force. You can easily configure an iPhone to wipe itself after too many wrong guesses. There's a single checkbox labeled "Erase Data", saying "Erase all data on this iPhone after 10 failed passcode attempts."
An interface isn't enough. Even if you never look at the code, the results are going to be influenced significantly by having the vocabulary to accurately describe what you want. The less sufficient your technical vocabulary, the more ambiguous your prompts will be and the less likely it is that the Polecats will be able to deliver anything resembling your unspoken imagination. To say nothing of being able to guide the lost critters when they run into problems.
It sounds like a medical device, in which case marketing it may require FDA approval or notification. Whereas vibe-coding a one-off tool for yourself might still require validation but you're the one taking the risk and accepting liability for it.
I think the thing you're missing is that the tool doesn't need to be marketed because someone else could ask their LLM to make them a similar tool but fitting their use case.
If they're using a 100% vibe-coded tool that they've never read the code of to replace something that would require government approval, for use on real-world patients, they're probably committing medical malpractice as we speak. Let us pray that is not the case.
It doesn't matter if the tool "needs" to be marketed. There is a market of paying customers. If other people are paying $200/month, both your and their lives would be improved significantly by you offering a $100/month replacement software. For all the talk about LLMs replacing the need for packaged software, people are still paying for packaged software, and while they are, you could be making large amounts of money while saving them money. If you're altruistic, you could even release it as FOSS and save a lot of people $200/mo. Unless, of course, your vibe-coded app isn't actually remotely capable of replacing the software in question.
Jumping to conclusion that I’m committing malpractice is completely uncalled for and offensive.
> Unless, of course, your vibe-coded app isn't actually remotely capable of replacing the software in question.
It is completely capable FOR ME. I’m not interested in publishing it because I love my job and it pays great already.
He's not giving you more accuracy though. A machine that's accurate to 1/32" is accurate to .75mm. If those cheap bolts were in US customary they would still need to be in smaller increments.
I think you're both right. Capitalism is an important part of a liberal society. But when we let private institutions become all-powerful then they can erode our freedom too. The problem isn't government or enterprise, it's the idea that only one of these things should be paramount. We need government to do unprofitable but necessary things and we need enterprise to pursue risky things. And we need government to regulate enterprise and enterprise to hold government accountable.
You can name a lot of symptoms of the problem but at its heart there's a lack of accountability in any of our power structures whether they be corporate or government.
I disagree with the idea that regulations work. Just consider forever chemicals like phthalates... Known endocrine disruptors. They're everywhere disrupting our hormones and health. Carcinogens are everywhere. How is regulation really working?
What works is the threat of punishment and full liability as opposed to limited liability. Regulations just raise entry barriers and stifle competition which makes the system less fair. It's like trying to prevent a crime before it happens; makes no sense. If liability is limited it means that somebody is not being held accountable for some portion of the damage that they're doing. Limited liability just externalizes the surplus liability to society...
I think capitalism can work if operating on a level monetary playing field within simple guardrails but without regulations. We could have wealth tax above a certain high amount to prevent political power imbalance.
It would be all massively worst without regulations. In fact, regulation provably works. When you remove it, situation with pollution and health gets worst. If you add it, it gets better.
> What works is the threat of punishment
That is what regulations provide.
> full liability
Without regulation and just a court system, this is complete failure. This just ensure that you can harm people who cant afford expensive lawsuits. Which is why big companies who want to pollute preferer this over regulations.
And the most harmed companies are small ones. They do not know in advance what is allowed and what is not.
You're mad about loopholes and lack of enforcement. Not the regulations theselves. If you can't enforce it, it's not a good regulation.
And yes, some things do need higher bars to entry than others. That's a feature. You don't want just anyone handling the food you eat or the money you store.
From Wikipedia:
> The first caliper with a secondary scale, which contributed extra precision, was invented in 1631 by the French mathematician Pierre Vernier (1580–1637).[1] Its use was described in detail in English in Navigatio Britannica (1750) by mathematician and historian John Barrow.[2] While calipers are the most typical use of vernier scales today, they were originally developed for angle-measuring instruments such as astronomical quadrants.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vernier_scale
So it would have been a contemporaneous technique with that initial angle measurement, and the use of a Vernier scale for angular measurements would have itself been common.
reply