Yes, is that (obvious) point being addressed in the paper? At first skimming, it just says that a "sufficiently souped up laptop" could, in principle, compute the future of the universe (i.e. Laplace's daemon), but I haven't seen anything about the subsequent questions of time scales.

Computing the future is cool, but computing the past state is also really cool as it essentially allows time travel into (a copy of) the past.

But it's ok if done by AI companies?

Interesting, got 61 points in 1h, but is off the front page due to being a dupe? (I can't find the thread it's a duplicate of.)

You can have the data safely on-prem, connected to computers that are connected to the internet, or safely in the cloud, connected to computers that are connected to the internet. The threats are not that different.

> App Store search results to be roughly torrent search levels of trustworthy

Well put. So it is a combination of a walled garden and a torrent search; just not sure whether it's the best of both worlds or the worst.

I searched for "Sparkasse" on the German Apple App Store, the good old staid conservative public savings bank. The top result was an ad for Crypto.com: Buy BTC, ETC, ...

Search it in DuckDuckGo or your search engine + ios unless you were just doing an experiment to see if you would get the expected result

Appraven has collections which are pretty handy, like actually curated lists

Quality of life in HK is quite high, btw, plenty of green, parks, and sky. (However, no cycling in the centre, only the outer areas or islands.)

Yes, I know, I was there again very recently and it's still mostly as nice as I remembered, lovely city all around and fascinating buildings, infrastructure and overall city :) It's quite different than other metropolitan cities, and I didn't mean it as a jab or anything, was just trying to "paint a picture", no offense meant :)

The ongoing enshittification of Coursera, Udacity, and EdX is sad to watch.

Wonder how Khan Academy is doing these days.

Still slaps

Pet peeve:

> N^2 scaling: if every fed has to talk to every other fed to exchange messages, the number of connections will scale exponentially

No. That's quadratic growth, which is a fairly mild form of polynomial growth, which is much much much slower than exponential growth.

   k   k^2   2^k
   1     1     1
  10   100  1024
 100   1e4  1e30

In fairness here, when it comes to large distributed networks, this type of scaling is generally unacceptable.

But yes i agree its really sloppy for them to say exponential. I'd actually call it linear since what matters (mostly) is how many connections each node has to do, not the total number of connections in the system.

Nonetheless imagine if email worked by making a connection to every computer in the world to check if they had mail for you. It would obviously not work.

Indeed. Read some of the Project Euler discussions (after solving a problem). The J answers tend to be very short and very fast.