10 interesting stories served every morning and every evening.




1 416 shares, 22 trendiness

Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

To help train AI mod­els, Meta and other tech com­pa­nies have down­loaded and shared pi­rated books via BitTorrent from Anna’s Archive and other shadow li­braries. In an on­go­ing law­suit, Meta now ar­gues that up­load­ing pi­rated books to strangers via BitTorrent qual­i­fies as fair use. The com­pany also stresses that the data helped es­tab­lish U. S. global lead­er­ship in AI.

To help train AI mod­els, Meta and other tech com­pa­nies have down­loaded and shared pi­rated books via BitTorrent from Anna’s Archive and other shadow li­braries. In an on­go­ing law­suit, Meta now ar­gues that up­load­ing pi­rated books to strangers via BitTorrent qual­i­fies as fair use. The com­pany also stresses that the data helped es­tab­lish U. S. global lead­er­ship in AI.

In the race to build the most ca­pa­ble LLM mod­els, sev­eral tech com­pa­nies sourced copy­righted con­tent for use as train­ing data, with­out ob­tain­ing per­mis­sion from con­tent own­ers.

Meta, the par­ent com­pany of Facebook and Instagram, was one of the com­pa­nies to get sued. In 2023, well-known book au­thors, in­clud­ing Richard Kadrey, Sarah Silverman, and Christopher Golden, filed a class-ac­tion law­suit against the com­pany.

Last sum­mer, Meta scored a key vic­tory in this case, as the court con­cluded that us­ing pi­rated books to train its Llama LLM qual­i­fied as fair use, based on the ar­gu­ments pre­sented in this case. This was a bit­ter­sweet vic­tory, how­ever, as Meta re­mained on the hook for down­load­ing and shar­ing the books via BitTorrent.

By down­load­ing books from shadow li­braries such as Anna’s Archive, Meta re­lied on BitTorrent trans­fers. In ad­di­tion to down­load­ing con­tent, these typ­i­cally up­load data to oth­ers as well. According to the au­thors, this means that Meta was en­gaged in wide­spread and di­rect copy­right in­fringe­ment.

In re­cent months, the law­suit con­tin­ued based on this re­main­ing di­rect copy­right in­fringe­ment claim. While both par­ties col­lected ad­di­tional ev­i­dence through the dis­cov­ery process, it re­mained un­clear what de­fense Meta would use. Until now.

Last week, Meta served a sup­ple­men­tal in­ter­roga­tory re­sponse at the California fed­eral court, which marks a new di­rec­tion in its de­fense. For the first time, the com­pany ar­gued that up­load­ing pi­rated books to other BitTorrent users dur­ing the tor­rent down­load process also qual­i­fies as fair use.

Meta’s rea­son­ing is straight­for­ward. Anyone who uses BitTorrent to trans­fer files au­to­mat­i­cally up­loads con­tent to other peo­ple, as it is in­her­ent to the pro­to­col. In other words, the up­load­ing was­n’t a choice, it was sim­ply how the tech­nol­ogy works.

Meta also ar­gued that the BitTorrent shar­ing was a ne­ces­sity to get the valu­able (but pi­rated) data. In the case of Anna’s Archive, Meta said, the datasets were only avail­able in bulk through tor­rent down­loads, mak­ing BitTorrent the only prac­ti­cal op­tion.

Meta used BitTorrent be­cause it was a more ef­fi­cient and re­li­able means of ob­tain­ing the datasets, and in the case of Anna’s Archive, those datasets were only avail­able in bulk through tor­rent down­loads,” Meta’s at­tor­ney writes.

Accordingly, to the ex­tent Plaintiffs can come forth with ev­i­dence that their works or por­tions thereof were the­o­ret­i­cally made avail­able’ to oth­ers on the BitTorrent net­work dur­ing the tor­rent down­load process, this was part-and-par­cel of the down­load of Plaintiffs’ works in fur­ther­ance of Meta’s trans­for­ma­tive fair use pur­pose.”

In other words, ob­tain­ing the mil­lions of books that were needed to en­gage in the fair use train­ing of its LLM, re­quired the di­rect down­load­ing, which ul­ti­mately serves the same fair use pur­pose.

The au­thors were not happy with last week’s late Friday sub­mis­sion and the new de­fense. On Monday morn­ing, their lawyers filed a let­ter with Judge Vince Chhabria flag­ging the late-night fil­ing as an im­proper end-run around the dis­cov­ery dead­line.

They point out that Meta had been aware of the up­load­ing claims since November 2024, but that it never brought up this fair use de­fense in the past, not even when the court asked about it.

The let­ter specif­i­cally men­tions that while Meta has a continuing duty” to sup­ple­ment dis­cov­ery un­der Rule 26(e), this rule does not cre­ate a loophole” al­low­ing a party to add new de­fenses to its ad­van­tage af­ter a court dead­line has passed.

Meta (for un­der­stand­able rea­sons) never once sug­gested it would as­sert a fair use de­fense to the up­load­ing-based claims, in­clud­ing af­ter this Court raised the is­sue with Meta last November,” the lawyers write.

Meta’s le­gal team fired back the fol­low­ing day, fil­ing their own let­ter with Judge Chhabria. This let­ter ex­plains that the fair use ar­gu­ment for the di­rect copy­right in­fringe­ment claim is not new at all.

Meta pointed to the par­ties’ joint December 2025 case man­age­ment state­ment, in which it had ex­plic­itly flagged the de­fense, and noted that the au­thor’s own at­tor­ney had ad­dressed it at a court hear­ing days later.

In short, Plaintiffs’ as­ser­tion that Meta never once sug­gested it would as­sert a fair use de­fense to the up­load­ing-based claims, in­clud­ing af­ter’ the November 2025 hear­ing, is false” Meta’s at­tor­ney writes in the let­ter.

Meanwhile, it’s worth not­ing that Meta’s in­ter­roga­tory re­sponse also cites de­po­si­tion tes­ti­mony from the au­thors them­selves, us­ing their own words to bol­ster its fair use de­fense.

The com­pany notes that every named au­thor has ad­mit­ted they are un­aware of any Meta model out­put that repli­cates con­tent from their books. Sarah Silverman, when asked whether it mat­tered if Meta’s mod­els never out­put lan­guage from her book, tes­ti­fied that It does­n’t mat­ter at all.”

Meta ar­gues these ad­mis­sions un­der­cut any the­ory of mar­ket harm. If the au­thors them­selves can­not point to in­fring­ing out­put or lost sales, the law­suit is less about pro­tect­ing their books and more about chal­leng­ing the train­ing process it­self, which the court al­ready ruled was fair use.

These ad­mis­sions were cen­tral to Meta’s fair use de­fense on the train­ing claims, which Meta won last sum­mer. Whether they carry the same weight in the re­main­ing BitTorrent dis­tri­b­u­tion dis­pute has yet to be seen.

In its in­ter­roga­tory re­sponse, Meta added fur­ther weight by stress­ing that its in­vest­ment in AI has helped the U. S. to es­tab­lish U.S. global lead­er­ship, putting the coun­try ahead of geopo­lit­i­cal com­peti­tors. That’s a valu­able as­set worth trea­sur­ing, it in­di­rectly sug­gested.

As the case moves for­ward, Judge Chhabria will have to de­cide whether to al­low this fair use by tech­ni­cal ne­ces­sity” de­fense. Needless to say, this will be of vi­tal im­por­tance to this and many other AI law­suits, where the use of shadow li­braries is at stake.

For now, the BitTorrent dis­tri­b­u­tion claims re­main the last live piece of a law­suit filed in 2023. Whether Judge Chhabria will al­low Meta’s new de­fense to pro­ceed has yet to be seen.

A copy of Meta’s sup­ple­men­tal in­ter­roga­tory re­sponse is avail­able here (pdf). The au­thors’ let­ter to Judge Chhabria can be found here (pdf). Meta’s re­sponse to that let­ter is avail­able here (pdf).

...

Read the original on torrentfreak.com »

2 384 shares, 22 trendiness

Ki Editor

Bridge the gap be­tween cod­ing in­tent and ac­tion: ma­nip­u­late syn­tax struc­tures di­rectly, avoid­ing mouse or key­board gym­nas­tics. Amplify your cod­ing ef­fi­ciency: wield mul­ti­ple cur­sors for par­al­lel syn­tax node op­er­a­tions, rev­o­lu­tion­iz­ing bulk ed­its and refac­tor­ing.Se­lec­tion Modes stan­dard­ize move­ments across words, lines, syn­tax nodes, and more, of­fer­ing un­prece­dented flex­i­bil­ity and con­sis­tency.

...

Read the original on ki-editor.org »

3 304 shares, 33 trendiness

Put the ZIP code first.

A US ZIP code is 5 char­ac­ters. From those 5 char­ac­ters you can de­ter­mine the city, the state, and the coun­try. That’s 3 fields. Autofilled. From one in­put.

But you don’t do that, do you? No. You make me type my street ad­dress, then my city, then scroll through a drop­down of 50 states to find Illinois wedged be­tween Idaho and Indiana, then type my ZIP, then — the pièce de ré­sis­tance — scroll through 200+ coun­tries to find United States, which half the time is filed un­der T” be­cause some dip­shit thought The United States of America” was the cor­rect sort key.

It’s 2026. What the fuck are we do­ing.

I type 90210. You now know I’m in Beverly Hills, California, United States. You did­n’t need me to tell you that. You did­n’t need a drop­down. You did­n’t need me to scroll past Turkmenistan. You had the an­swer the en­tire time, in 5 dig­its, and you just… did­n’t use it.

And here’s the bonus: once you know the ZIP, your street ad­dress au­to­com­plete is search­ing a few thou­sand ad­dresses in­stead of 160 mil­lion. It’s faster. It’s more ac­cu­rate. I type less. You get cleaner data. Everyone wins.

This is not new tech­nol­ogy. Free APIs ex­ist. It’s like 4 lines of code. Look:

const res = await fetch(`https://​api.zip­popotam.us/​us/${​zip}`)

const data = await res.json()

city.value = data.places[0][“place name”]

state.value = data.places[0][“state”]

coun­try.value = United States”

That’s it. That’s the whole thing. You could have shipped this in­stead of read­ing this web­site.

See how that works? See how you typed 5 num­bers and 3 fields filled them­selves in? See how you’re now typ­ing your street ad­dress and it al­ready knows what city you’re in? That’s not magic. That’s a lookup table. We’ve had those since the 1960s.

Tier 1: ZIP at the bot­tom. Street, city, state, ZIP, coun­try. You had the data to aut­ofill 3 fields and you just… put it last. Amazon does this. Target does this. Walmart does this. Basically every­one does this. Billions of col­lec­tive hours of hu­man life, spent scrolling for Illinois.”

Tier 2: No aut­ofill at all. You col­lect the ZIP. You have the ZIP. You do noth­ing with it. The ZIP just sits there in your data­base, in­ert, like a fire ex­tin­guisher in a glass case that says do not break.” What are you sav­ing it for.

Tier 3: The scrol­lable coun­try drop­down. 240 coun­tries. No search. No type-ahead. Just pure, un­fil­tered, al­pha­bet­i­cal scrolling. Bonus points if the US is un­der T.” Extra bonus points if it’s not even al­pha­bet­i­cal. You ab­solute psy­chopaths.

Tier 4: The form that re­sets when you hit back. I filled out 14 fields. Your pay­ment proces­sor failed. I hit back. Everything is gone. My street. My city. My state. My will to live. All of it. Returned to the void. The de­vel­oper re­spon­si­ble for this sleeps eight hours a night. That’s the part that haunts me.

While we’re here:

Invoke the right key­board. If you’re ask­ing for a ZIP code, use in­put­mode=“nu­meric”. It’s one HTML at­tribute. On mo­bile, I should see a num­ber pad, not a full QWERTY key­board. This ap­plies to phone num­bers, credit cards, and any­thing else that’s ob­vi­ously just dig­its. You al­ready know the in­put type. Tell the phone.

Work with aut­ofill, not against it. Browsers have had aut­ofill for over a decade. Use the right au­to­com­plete at­trib­utes — postal-code, ad­dress-line1, coun­try. If your form fights the browser’s aut­ofill, your form is wrong. The browser is try­ing to save your user 45 sec­onds. Let it.

Fine, maybe coun­try first. The purists in the com­ments are tech­ni­cally cor­rect — postal codes aren’t glob­ally unique. You could do coun­try first (pre-filled via IP), then postal code, then let the magic hap­pen. The point was never skip the coun­try field.” The point is: stop mak­ing me type things you al­ready know.

Found a site that puts the ZIP code last? A coun­try drop­down sorted by vibes? A form that makes you cry?

Send it to us →

Put the ZIP code first. Autofill the city. Autofill the state. Autofill the coun­try. Let the user type their street ad­dress last, with au­to­com­plete scoped to their ZIP.

It is a solved prob­lem. The API is free. The code is 5 lines. There is gen­uinely no rea­son not to do this other than the mass in­sti­tu­tional in­er­tia of a mil­lion prod­uct man­agers copy-past­ing the same ad­dress form tem­plate from 2009 and never once ask­ing wait, why is the ZIP code at the bot­tom?”

Why is the ZIP code at the bot­tom?

Put it first, you an­i­mals.

Tweet this ·

Post to HN ·

Copy link

Share this be­fore you have to fill out an­other ad­dress form.

...

Read the original on zipcodefirst.com »

4 288 shares, 30 trendiness

Merkley, Klobuchar Launch New Effort to Ban Federal Elected Officials Profiting from Prediction Markets

Effort comes af­ter re­ports of in­di­vid­u­als sus­pi­ciously earn­ing mas­sive pay­outs be­fore Iran Strikes, Venezuela Military Actions

Washington, D. C. — Today, Oregon’s U.S. Senator Jeff Merkley and Minnesota’s U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar launched a new ef­fort to pre­vent gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials at the high­est lev­els from en­gag­ing in pre­dic­tion mar­kets, crack­ing down on the po­ten­tial for any in­sider trad­ing.

Following mul­ti­ple pub­lic re­ports on the grow­ing in­flu­ence of pre­dic­tion mar­kets and their po­ten­tial for cor­rup­tion, Merkley and Klobuchar in­tro­duced the End Prediction Market Corruption Act—a new bill to ban the President, Vice President, Members of Congress, and other pub­lic of­fi­cials from trad­ing event con­tracts. The bill will en­sure that fed­eral elected of­fi­cials main­tain their oath of of­fice to serve the peo­ple by pre­vent­ing them from trad­ing on in­for­ma­tion that they gained through their role.

When pub­lic of­fi­cials use non-pub­lic in­for­ma­tion to win a bet, you have the per­fect recipe to un­der­mine the pub­lic’s be­lief that gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials are work­ing for the pub­lic good, not for their own per­sonal prof­its,” said Merkley. Perfectly timed bets on pre­dic­tion mar­kets have the un­mis­tak­able stench of cor­rup­tion. To pro­tect the pub­lic in­ter­est, Congress must step up and pass my End Prediction Market Corruption Act to crack down on this bad bet for democ­racy.”

At the same time that pre­dic­tion mar­kets have seen huge growth, we have seen in­creas­ing re­ports of mis­con­duct. This leg­is­la­tion strength­ens the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s abil­ity to go af­ter bad ac­tors and pro­vides rules of the road to pre­vent those with con­fi­den­tial gov­ern­ment or pol­icy in­for­ma­tion from ex­ploit­ing their ac­cess for fi­nan­cial gain,” said Klobuchar.

Merkley and Klobuchar’s End Prediction Market Corruption Act is cosponsored by U. S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Adam Schiff (D-CA), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY).

Their bill is sup­ported by Public Citizen, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), and Project On Government Oversight (POGO).

The American peo­ple de­serve un­wa­ver­ing eth­i­cal stan­dards from their gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials. Officials have a re­spon­si­bil­ity to avoid not only ac­tual con­flicts of in­ter­est but even the ap­pear­ance of im­pro­pri­ety. POGO is pleased to en­dorse the End Prediction Market Corruption Act, which will fur­ther pro­hibit cov­ered gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials from ex­ploit­ing non­pub­lic in­for­ma­tion for per­sonal gain in pre­dic­tion mar­kets,” said Janice Luong, Policy Associate for the Project On Government Oversight (POGO).

It is now more im­por­tant than ever that pre­dic­tion mar­kets be gov­erned by eth­i­cal con­straints, es­pe­cially when it comes to bets placed by gov­ern­men­tal of­fi­cials. Sen. Merkley’s leg­is­la­tion would ap­pro­pri­ately pro­hibit key gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials from buy­ing or sell­ing on the pre­dic­tion mar­kets con­tracts in which they could have in­sider in­for­ma­tion on changes in the mar­ket. Public Citizen heartily en­dorses this bill,” said Craig Holman, Ph. D., Public Citizen.

The rapid rise of re­tail pre­dic­tion mar­kets cre­ates the risk that of­fi­cials across the gov­ern­ment could use non­pub­lic in­for­ma­tion to trade on and profit off event con­tracts,” said Debra Perlin, Vice President of Policy of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). “The American people must be able to trust that their gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials are work­ing on their be­half rather than for per­sonal gain. Senator Merkley’s leg­is­la­tion rep­re­sents a vi­tal step for­ward to en­sure that those in po­si­tions of power, in­clud­ing se­nior ex­ec­u­tive branch of­fi­cials and mem­bers of Congress, can­not abuse their ac­cess to non­pub­lic in­for­ma­tion in or­der to profit.”

Merkley has been a long-time leader in the push to end pub­lic cor­rup­tion. He has led the charge to crack down on elec­tion gam­bling and dark money in pol­i­tics, pre­vent law­mak­ers from trad­ing stocks, and ban cryp­tocur­rency-re­lated cor­rup­tion by elected of­fi­cials at the high­est lev­els of the fed­eral gov­ern­ment.

Full text of the End Prediction Market Corruption Act can be found by click­ing here.

...

Read the original on www.merkley.senate.gov »

5 226 shares, 26 trendiness

0x0mer/CasNum

CasNum (Compass and straight­edge Number) is a li­brary that im­ple­ments ar­bi­trary pre­ci­sion arith­metic us­ing

com­pass and straight­edge con­struc­tions. Arbitrary pre­ci­sion arith­metic, now with 100% more Euclid. Featuring a func­tional mod­i­fied Game Boy em­u­la­tor where every ALU op­code is im­ple­mented en­tirely through geo­met­ric con­struc­tions.

This pro­ject be­gan with a sim­ple com­pass-and-straight­edge engine’, which can be found un­der the di­rec­tory cas/. In com­pass-and-straight­edge con­struc­tions, one start with just two points: The ori­gin, and a unit. Exactly as God in­tended. The en­gine then al­lows us to do what the an­cients did:

* Construct the line through two points

* Construct the cir­cle that con­tains one point and has a cen­ter at an­other point

* Construct the point at the in­ter­sec­tion of two (non-parallel) lines

* Construct the one or two points in the in­ter­sec­tion of a line and a cir­cle (if they in­ter­sect)

* Construct the one point or two points in the in­ter­sec­tion of two cir­cles (if they in­ter­sect) (Which, by the way turns out to be a nasty 4th de­gree equa­tion. Check out the for­mula in cir­cle.py, over 3600 char­ac­ters, yikes. Good thing we have WolframAlpha).

These five con­struc­tions are con­sid­ered the ba­sic com­pass and straight­edge con­struc­tions. Think of these as your ISA.

On top of the com­pass-and-straight­edge en­gine, we have the CasNum class. In CasNum, a num­ber x is rep­re­sented as the point (x,0) in the plane. Now, the fun part: im­ple­ment­ing all arith­metic and log­i­cal op­er­a­tions. We can con­struct the ad­di­tion of two points by find­ing the mid­point be­tween them and dou­bling it, which are both stan­dard com­pass-and-straight­edge con­struc­tions. Then, we can build the prod­uct and quo­tient of num­bers us­ing tri­an­gle sim­i­lar­ity. The log­i­cal op­er­a­tions (AND, OR, XOR) are a lit­tle uglier, since they are not a clean al­ge­braic op­er­a­tion” in the rel­e­vant sense, but, hey, it works right?

What I thought was pretty neat is that im­ple­ment­ing all this from scratch leaves a lot of room for op­ti­miza­tion. For ex­am­ple, mul­ti­pli­ca­tion by 2 can be im­ple­mented much more ef­fi­ciently than the generic al­go­rithm for mul­ti­pli­ca­tion us­ing tri­an­gle sim­i­lar­ity. Then, im­ple­ment­ing mod­ulo by first re­mov­ing the high­est power of two times the mod­u­lus from the div­i­dend yielded much bet­ter re­sults than the naive im­ple­men­ta­tion.

* Integrate into the ALU of a Game Boy em­u­la­tor, thus ob­tain­ing a Game Boy that arith­meti­cally and log­i­cally runs solely on com­pass and straight­edge con­struc­tions

The first two ex­am­ples were ac­tu­ally im­ple­mented and can be found un­der the ex­am­ples/ di­rec­tory. So ap­par­ently one can­not square the cir­cle

us­ing a com­pass and a straight­edge, but at least one can run Pokémon Red. Man, I’m sure the an­cient Greeks would have loved to see this.

Thanks to the great code writ­ten by PyBoy, in­te­grat­ing CasNum within it was pretty seam­less. The only file I needed to edit was op­codes_­gen.py, and the edit was pretty min­i­mal.

As al­ways, please save any im­por­tant work be­fore run­ning any­thing I ever write.

To clone the repo, and in­stall re­quire­ments:

git clone –recursive git@github.com:0x0mer/CasNum.git

cd CasNum

pip in­stall -r re­quire­ments.txt

You can run the rsa and ba­sic ex­am­ples from the re­po’s root di­rec­tory like so:

python3 -m ex­am­ples.ba­sic

python3 -m ex­am­ples.rsa

The li­brary comes with a viewer (casnum/cas/viewer.py) that shows the com­pass and straight­edge con­struc­tions. It has an au­to­matic zoom that kinda works, but it goes crazy in the rsa ex­am­ple, so you may want to use man­ual zoom there.

In or­der to run PyBoy, first you need a ROM. In or­der to avoid copy­right in­fringe­ment, I in­cluded the ROM for 2048, free to dis­trib­ute un­der the zlib li­cense. But if, for ex­am­ple, the ROM you have is Pokemon.gb’, then you can place it in ex­am­ples/​Py­boy and run:

cd ex­am­ples/​Py­Boy

pip in­stall -r re­quire­ments.txt

PYTHONPATH=../.. python

Then, once in python, run:

from py­boy im­port PyBoy

from cas­num im­port viewer

viewer.start()

py­boy = PyBoy(‘2048.gb’) # Or what­ever ROM you have

while py­boy.tick():

pass

py­boy.stop()

the viewer.start() just dis­plays the com­pass-and-straight­edge con­struc­tions, it is not strictly needed, but it is fun.

Notice how­ever that the first run of Pokemon on the Game Boy em­u­la­tor takes ap­prox­i­mately 15 min­utes to boot, so play­ing it may re­quire some­what in­creased pa­tience. You see, Euclid would­n’t have op­ti­mized the Game Boy boot screen. He would have spent those 15 min­utes in silent ap­pre­ci­a­tion, think­ing, Yeah. That’s about how long that should take.”

After run­ning it once, most cal­cu­la­tions should al­ready be cached if you run it from the same python in­ter­preter in­stance, so on the sec­ond run you should be able to get a de­cent 0.5~1 FPS, which is to­tally al­most playable.

Most mod­ern de­vel­op­ers are con­tent with a + b. They don’t want to work for it. They don’t want to see the mid­point be­ing birthed from the in­ter­sec­tion of two cir­cles.

CasNum is for the de­vel­oper who be­lieves that if you did­n’t have to solve a 4th-degree poly­no­mial just to in­cre­ment a loop counter, you did­n’t re­ally in­cre­ment it.

Python’s lru_­cache is used to cache al­most any cal­cu­la­tion done in the li­brary, as every­thing is so ex­pen­sive. Memory us­age may blow up, run at your own risk.

* py­glet (optional but highly rec­om­mended. Only needed if you want to dis­play the

com­pass-and-straight­edge con­struc­tions)

* pytest-lazy-fix­tures (Only needed in or­der to run the tests)

* py­cryptodome (Only needed if you want to run the rsa ex­am­ple)

A: It can’t re­ally run” any­thing, its a num­ber.

A: Define fast”. If you mean faster than copy­ing Euclid by hand”, then yes, dra­mat­i­cally.

Q: Why did you make this?

A: I wanted ar­bi­trary pre­ci­sion arith­metic, but I also wanted to feel some­thing.

The code in the root of this repos­i­tory is li­censed un­der the MIT License.

This pro­ject in­cor­po­rates the fol­low­ing third-party ma­te­ri­als:

PyBoy (Modified): Located in ./examples/PyBoy/. Distributed un­der the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) v3.0.

Notice of Modification: This ver­sion of PyBoy has been mod­i­fied from the orig­i­nal source code to use the CasNum li­brary in­stead of Python’s int.

The orig­i­nal, un­mod­i­fied source code for PyBoy can be found at: https://​github.com/​Baekalfen/​Py­Boy.

The full LGPL li­cense text is avail­able in ./examples/PyBoy/License.md.

* Notice of Modification: This ver­sion of PyBoy has been mod­i­fied from the orig­i­nal source code to use the CasNum li­brary in­stead of Python’s int.

* The orig­i­nal, un­mod­i­fied source code for PyBoy can be found at: https://​github.com/​Baekalfen/​Py­Boy.

* The full LGPL li­cense text is avail­able in ./examples/PyBoy/License.md.

2048.gb: This Game Boy ROM bi­nary is dis­trib­uted un­der the zlib License.

Disclaimer: This soft­ware is pro­vided as-is’, with­out any ex­press or im­plied war­ranty. In no event will the au­thors be held li­able for any dam­ages aris­ing from the use of this soft­ware.

* Disclaimer: This soft­ware is pro­vided as-is’, with­out any ex­press or im­plied war­ranty. In no event will the au­thors be held li­able for any dam­ages aris­ing from the use of this soft­ware.

...

Read the original on github.com »

6 216 shares, 14 trendiness

The yoghurt delivery women combatting loneliness in Japan

As lone­li­ness deep­ens in one of the world’s fastest-age­ing na­tions, a net­work of women de­liv­er­ing pro­bi­otic milk drinks has be­come a vi­tal source of rou­tine, con­nec­tion and care.

A woman in a neat navy suit and pow­der-blue shirt cy­cles pur­pose­fully down a quiet res­i­den­tial street in Tokyo. It’s 08:30 but al­ready balmy, and she’s grate­ful for the match­ing vi­sor that shields her eyes from the sum­mer sun.

She ar­rives at her first stop, parks her bike and knocks on the door of a small wooden house with pot­ted plants flank­ing the en­trance. Inside, an el­derly woman waits. Her face breaks into a broad smile as she opens the door — she has been ex­pect­ing this visit.

Japan is the world’s most rapidly age­ing ma­jor econ­omy. Nearly 30% of its pop­u­la­tion is now over 65, and the num­ber of el­derly peo­ple liv­ing alone con­tin­ues to rise. As fam­i­lies shrink and tra­di­tional multi-gen­er­a­tional house­holds de­cline, iso­la­tion has be­come one of the coun­try’s most press­ing so­cial chal­lenges.

The suited woman is a Yakult Lady — one of tens of thou­sands across Japan who de­liver the epony­mous pro­bi­otic drinks di­rectly to peo­ple’s homes. On pa­per they’re de­liv­ery work­ers, but in prac­tice they’re part of the coun­try’s in­for­mal so­cial safety net. In a coun­try grap­pling with a rapidly age­ing pop­u­la­tion and a deep­en­ing lone­li­ness cri­sis, Yakult Ladies have be­come an un­likely source of com­mu­nity, help­ing to re­duce the prob­lem of iso­la­tion one drop-off at a time.

With their dis­tinc­tive squat plas­tic bot­tles and shiny red caps, Yakult pi­o­neered a genre. The pro­bi­otic drink was launched in Japan 90 years ago — long be­fore microbiome” be­came com­mon par­lance. But to­day, the women who de­liver them are as im­por­tant to the brand’s iden­tity as the prod­uct it­self.

...

Read the original on www.bbc.com »

7 207 shares, 23 trendiness

Insider Trading Is Going to Get People Killed

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was not, it’s safe to as­sume, a de­voted Polymarket user. If he had been, the Iranian leader might still be alive. Hours be­fore Khamenei’s com­pound in Tehran was re­duced to rub­ble last week, an ac­count un­der the user­name magamyman” bet about $20,000 that the supreme leader would no longer be in power by the end of March. Polymarket placed the odds at just 14 per­cent, net­ting magamyman” a profit of more than $120,000.

Everyone knew that an at­tack might be in the works—some American air­craft car­ri­ers had al­ready been de­ployed to the Middle East weeks ago—but the Iranian gov­ern­ment was caught off guard by the tim­ing. Although the ay­a­tol­lah surely was aware of the risks to his life, he pre­sum­ably did not know that he would be tar­geted on this par­tic­u­lar Saturday morn­ing. Yet on Polymarket, plenty of warn­ing signs pointed to an im­pend­ing at­tack. The day be­fore, 150 users bet at least $1,000 that the United States would strike Iran within the next 24 hours, ac­cord­ing to a New York Times analy­sis. Until then, few peo­ple on the plat­form were bet­ting that kind of money on an im­me­di­ate at­tack.

Maybe all of this sounds eerily fa­mil­iar. In January, some­one on Polymarket made a se­ries of sus­pi­ciously well-timed bets right be­fore the U. S. at­tacked a for­eign coun­try and de­posed its leader. By the time Nicolás Maduro was ex­tracted from Venezuela and flown to New York, the user had pock­eted more than $400,000. Perhaps this trader and the Iran bet­tors who are now flush with cash sim­ply had the luck of a life­time—the gam­bling equiv­a­lent of mak­ing a half-court shot. Or maybe they knew what was hap­pen­ing ahead of time and flipped it for easy money. We sim­ply do not know.

Polymarket traders swap crypto, not cash, and con­ceal their iden­ti­ties through the blockchain. Even so, in­ves­ti­ga­tions into in­sider trad­ing are al­ready un­der­way: Last month, Israel charged a mil­i­tary re­servist for al­legedly us­ing clas­si­fied in­for­ma­tion to make un­spec­i­fied bets on Polymarket.

The plat­form for­bids il­le­gal ac­tiv­ity, which in­cludes in­sider trad­ing in the U. S. But with a few taps on a smart­phone, any­one with priv­i­leged knowl­edge can now make a quick buck (or a hun­dred thou­sand). Polymarket and other pre­dic­tion mar­kets—the san­i­tized, in­dus­try-fa­vored term for sites that let you wa­ger on just about any­thing—have been dogged by ac­cu­sa­tions of in­sider trad­ing in mar­kets of all fla­vors. How did a Polymarket user know that Lady Gaga, Cardi B, and Ricky Martin would make sur­prise ap­pear­ances dur­ing the Super Bowl half­time show, but that Drake and Travis Scott would­n’t? Shady bets on war are even stranger and more dis­turb­ing. They risk un­leash­ing an en­tirely new kind of na­tional-se­cu­rity threat. The U.S. caught a break: The Venezuela and Iran strikes were not thwarted by in­sider traders whose bets could have prompted swift re­tal­i­a­tion. The next time, we may not be so lucky.

The at­tacks in Venezuela and Iran—like so many mil­i­tary cam­paigns—were con­ducted un­der the guise of se­crecy. You don’t swoop in on an ad­ver­sary when they know you are com­ing. The Venezuela raid was re­port­edly so con­fi­den­tial that Pentagon of­fi­cials did not know about its ex­act tim­ing un­til a few hours be­fore President Trump gave the or­ders.

Any in­sid­ers who put money down on im­pend­ing war may not have thought that they were giv­ing any­thing away. An anony­mous bet that reeks of in­sider trad­ing is not al­ways easy to spot in the mo­ment. After the sus­pi­cious Polymarket bets on the Venezuela raid, the site’s fore­cast placed the odds that Maduro would be ousted at roughly 10 per­cent. Even if Maduro and his team had been glued to Polymarket, it’s hard to imag­ine that such long odds would have com­pelled him to flee in the mid­dle of the night. And even with so many peo­ple bet­ting last Friday on an im­mi­nent strike in Iran, Polymarket fore­casted only a 26 per­cent chance, at most, of an at­tack the next day. What’s the sig­nal, and what’s the noise?

In both cases, some­one adept at pars­ing pre­dic­tion mar­kets could have known that some­thing was up. It’s pos­si­ble to spot these bets ahead of time,” Rajiv Sethi, a Barnard College econ­o­mist who stud­ies pre­dic­tion mar­kets, told me. There are some tell­tale be­hav­iors that could help dis­tin­guish a mil­i­tary con­trac­tor bet­ting off a state se­cret from a col­lege stu­dent mind­lessly scrolling on his phone af­ter one too many cans of Celsius. Someone who’s us­ing a newly cre­ated ac­count to wa­ger a lot of money against the con­ven­tional wis­dom is prob­a­bly the for­mer, not the lat­ter. And spot­ting these kinds of sus­pi­cious bet­tors is only get­ting eas­ier. The pre­dic­tion-mar­ket boom has cre­ated a cot­tage in­dus­try of tools that in­stan­ta­neously flag po­ten­tial in­sider trad­ing—not for le­gal pur­poses but so that you, too, can profit off of what the se­lect few al­ready know.

Unlike Kalshi, the other big pre­dic­tion-mar­ket plat­form, Polymarket can be used in the U. S only through a vir­tual pri­vate net­work, or VPN. In ef­fect, the site is able to skirt reg­u­la­tions that re­quire track­ing the iden­ti­ties of its cus­tomers and re­port­ing shady bets to the gov­ern­ment. In some ways, in­sider trad­ing seems to be the whole point: What’s cool about Polymarket is that it cre­ates this fi­nan­cial in­cen­tive for peo­ple to go and di­vulge the in­for­ma­tion to the mar­ket,” Shayne Coplan, the com­pa­ny’s 27-year-old CEO, said in an in­ter­view last year. (Polymarket did not re­spond to a re­quest for com­ment.)

Consider if the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had paid the monthly fee for a ser­vice that flagged rel­e­vant ac­tiv­ity on Polymarket two hours be­fore the strike. The supreme leader might not have hosted in-per­son meet­ings with his top ad­vis­ers where they were easy tar­gets for mis­siles. Perhaps Iran would have launched its own pre­emp­tive strikes, tar­get­ing mil­i­tary bases across the Middle East. Six American ser­vice mem­bers have al­ready died from Iran’s drone at­tacks in the re­gion; the death toll could have been higher if Iran had struck first. In other words, some­one’s idea of a get-rich-quick scheme may have ended with a mil­i­tary raid gone hor­ri­bly awry. (The Department of Defense did not re­spond to a re­quest for com­ment.)

Maybe this all sounds far-fetched, but it should­n’t. Any ad­vance no­tice to an ad­ver­sary is prob­lem­atic,” Alex Goldenberg, a fel­low at the Rutgers Miller Center who has writ­ten about war mar­kets, told me. And these pre­dic­tive mar­kets, as they stand, are de­signed to leak out this in­for­ma­tion.” In all like­li­hood, he added, in­tel­li­gence agen­cies across the world are al­ready pay­ing at­ten­tion to Polymarket. Last year, the mil­i­tary’s bul­letin for in­tel­li­gence pro­fes­sion­als pub­lished an ar­ti­cle ad­vo­cat­ing for the armed forces to in­te­grate data from Polymarket to more fully an­tic­i­pate na­tional se­cu­rity threats.” After all, the Pentagon al­ready has some ex­pe­ri­ence with pre­dic­tion mar­kets. During the War on Terror, DARPA toyed with cre­at­ing what it billed the Policy Analysis Market,” a site that would let anony­mous traders bet on world events to fore­cast ter­ror­ist at­tacks and coups. (Democrats in Congress re­volted, and the site was quickly canned.)

Now every ad­ver­sary and ter­ror­ist group in the world can eas­ily ac­cess war mar­kets that are far more ad­vanced than what the DOD ginned up two decades ago. What makes Polymarket’s en­trance into war­fare so trou­bling is not just po­ten­tial in­sider trad­ing from users like magamyman.” If gov­ern­ments are eye­ing Polymarket for signs of an im­pend­ing at­tack, they can also be led astray. A gov­ern­ment or an­other so­phis­ti­cated ac­tor would­n’t need to spend much money to mas­sively swing the Polymarket odds on whether a Gulf state will im­mi­nently strike Iran—breeding panic and para­noia. More fun­da­men­tally, pre­dic­tion mar­kets risk warp­ing the ba­sic in­cen­tives of war, Goldenberg said. He gave the ex­am­ple of a Ukrainian mil­i­tary com­man­der mak­ing less than $1,000 a month, who could place bets that go against his own mil­i­tary’s ob­jec­tive. Maybe you choose to re­treat a day early be­cause you can dou­ble, triple, or quadru­ple your money and then send that back to your fam­ily,” he said.

Again, we don’t know for sure whether any of this is hap­pen­ing. That may be the scari­est part. As long as Polymarket lets any­one bet on war anony­mously, we may never know. Last Saturday, the day of the ini­tial Iran at­tack, Polymarket processed a record $478 mil­lion in bets, ac­cord­ing to one analy­sis. All the while, Polymarket con­tin­ues to wedge it­self into the main­stream. Substack re­cently struck a part­ner­ship with Polymarket to in­cor­po­rate the plat­for­m’s fore­casts into its newslet­ters. (“Journalism is bet­ter when it’s backed by live mar­kets,” Polymarket posted on X in an­nounc­ing the deal.) All of this makes the site even more valu­able as an in­tel­li­gence as­set, and even more de­struc­tive for the rest of us. Polymarket keeps launch­ing more war mar­kets: Will the U. S. strike Iraq? Will Israel strike Beirut? Will Iran strike Cyprus? Somewhere out there, some­one likely al­ready knows the an­swers.

...

Read the original on www.theatlantic.com »

8 198 shares, 10 trendiness

US economy sheds 92,000 jobs in February in sharp slide

WorldIran warns it will hit US bases across re­gion hours af­ter pres­i­den­t’s apol­ogy In the cen­tre of the storm: what does the Iran war mean for Dubai?Trump’s war on Iran is spread­ing. Where does it stop?USIran warns it will hit US bases across re­gion hours af­ter pres­i­den­t’s apol­ogy Trump’s war on Iran is spread­ing. Where does it stop?Don­ald Trump calls for more US mil­i­tary ac­tion in Latin AmericaUS faced with few good op­tions to tamp down surg­ing oil prices CompaniesIn the cen­tre of the storm: what does the Iran war mean for Dubai?Is the night­mare sce­nario for global en­ergy here?The last of Hong Kong’s colo­nial-era trainee schemes­Ships in Gulf de­clare them­selves Chinese to dodge at­tack­TechUS draws up strict new AI guide­lines amid Anthropic clash­Google gives CEO Sundar Pichai new pay deal worth up to $692mnMarketsIs the night­mare sce­nario for global en­ergy here?US faced with few good op­tions to tamp down surg­ing oil prices Britain is now the home of the Middle ManInvestors are not ready for a true shockA week of war in charts: the im­pact on the USOpinionIs the night­mare sce­nario for global en­ergy here?Britain is now the home of the Middle ManWork & CareersGoogle gives CEO Sundar Pichai new pay deal worth up to $692mnPapier founder: I don’t own stocks or shares — it’s too much risk’Are you fi­nan­cially prepped’ for higher in­fla­tion? After years of pay gap re­port­ing, what do we know? Life & ArtsTrump’s war on Iran is spread­ing. Where does it stop?Marinelli: my 15-year quest to ski the biggest face in the Alps How To Spend It

US econ­omy sheds 92,000 jobs in February in sharp slide per month. Complete dig­i­tal ac­cess to qual­ity FT jour­nal­ism on any de­vice. Cancel any­time dur­ing your trial. Essential dig­i­tal ac­cess to qual­ity FT jour­nal­ism on any de­vice. Pay a year up­front and save 20%.Complete dig­i­tal ac­cess to qual­ity FT jour­nal­ism with ex­pert analy­sis from in­dus­try lead­ers. Pay a year up­front and save 20%.Check whether you al­ready have ac­cess via your uni­ver­sity or or­gan­i­sa­tion.Dis­cover all the plans cur­rently avail­able in your coun­try­See why over a mil­lion read­ers pay to read the Financial Times.Find out why

How To Spend It

...

Read the original on www.ft.com »

9 193 shares, 13 trendiness

Filesystems are having a moment

I used to work at a vec­tor data­base com­pany. My en­tire job was help­ing peo­ple un­der­stand why they needed a data­base pur­pose-built for AI; em­bed­dings, se­man­tic search, the whole thing. So it’s a lit­tle funny that I’m writ­ing this. But here I am, watch­ing every­one in the AI ecosys­tem sud­denly re­dis­cover the hum­ble filesys­tem, and I think they might be onto some­thing big­ger than most peo­ple re­al­ize.

Not big­ger than data­bases. Different from data­bases. I need to say that up­front be­cause I al­ready know some­one is go­ing to read this and think I’m say­ing files good, data­bases bad.” I’m not. Stay with me.

If you’ve been pay­ing any at­ten­tion to the AI agent space over the last few months, you’ve no­ticed some­thing strange. LlamaIndex pub­lished Files Are All You Need.” LangChain wrote about how agents can use filesys­tems for con­text en­gi­neer­ing. Oracle, yes Oracle (who is cook­ing btw), put out a piece com­par­ing filesys­tems and data­bases for agent mem­ory. Dan Abramov wrote about a so­cial filesys­tem built on the AT Protocol. Archil is build­ing cloud vol­umes specif­i­cally be­cause agents want POSIX file sys­tems.

Jerry Liu from LlamaIndex put it bluntly: in­stead of one agent with hun­dreds of tools, we’re mov­ing to­ward a world where the agent has ac­cess to a filesys­tem and maybe 5-10 tools. That’s it. Filesystem, code in­ter­preter, web ac­cess. And that’s as gen­eral, if not more gen­eral than an agent with 100+ MCP tools.

Karpathy made the ad­ja­cent ob­ser­va­tion that stuck with me. He pointed out that Claude Code works be­cause it runs on your com­puter, with your en­vi­ron­ment, your data, your con­text. It’s not a web­site you go to — it’s a lit­tle spirit that lives on your ma­chine. OpenAI got this wrong, he ar­gued, by fo­cus­ing on cloud de­ploy­ments in con­tain­ers or­ches­trated from ChatGPT in­stead of sim­ply run­ning on lo­cal­host.

And here’s the thing that makes all of this mat­ter com­mer­cially: cod­ing agents make up the ma­jor­ity of ac­tual AI use cases right now. Anthropic is re­port­edly ap­proach­ing prof­itabil­ity, and a huge chunk of that is dri­ven by Claude Code, a CLI tool. Not a chat­bot. A tool that reads and writes files on your filesys­tem.

Here’s where I think most of the dis­course misses the deeper point.

Memory; in the hu­man, psy­cho­log­i­cal sense is fun­da­men­tal to how we func­tion. We don’t re-read our en­tire life story every time we make a de­ci­sion. We have long-term stor­age, se­lec­tive re­call, the abil­ity to for­get things that don’t mat­ter and sur­face things that do. Context win­dows in LLMs are none of that. They’re more like a white­board that some­one keeps eras­ing.

If you’ve used Claude Code for any real pro­ject, you know the dread of watch­ing that context left un­til auto-com­pact” no­ti­fi­ca­tion creep closer. Your en­tire con­ver­sa­tion, all the con­text the agent has built up about your code­base, your pref­er­ences, your de­ci­sions about to be com­pressed or lost.

Filesystems solve this in the most bor­ing, ob­vi­ous way pos­si­ble. Write things down. Put them in files. Read them back when you need them. Claude’s CLAUDE.md file gives the agent per­sis­tent con­text about your pro­ject. Cursor stores past chat his­tory as search­able files. People are writ­ing aboutme.md files that act as portable iden­tity de­scrip­tors any agent can read i.e. your pref­er­ences, your skills, your work­ing style, all in a file that moves be­tween ap­pli­ca­tions with­out any­one need­ing to co­or­di­nate an API.

Except! It might not be quite that sim­ple.

A re­cent pa­per from ETH Zürich eval­u­ated whether these repos­i­tory-level con­text files ac­tu­ally help cod­ing agents com­plete tasks. The find­ing was coun­ter­in­tu­itive: across mul­ti­ple agents and mod­els, con­text files tended to re­duce task suc­cess rates while in­creas­ing in­fer­ence cost by over 20%. Agents given con­text files ex­plored more broadly, ran more tests, tra­versed more files — but all that thor­ough­ness de­layed them from ac­tu­ally reach­ing the code that needed fix­ing. The files acted like a check­list that agents took too se­ri­ously.

This sounds like it un­der­mines the whole premise. But I think it ac­tu­ally sharp­ens it. The pa­per’s con­clu­sion was­n’t don’t use con­text files.” It was that un­nec­es­sary re­quire­ments make tasks harder, and con­text files should de­scribe only min­i­mal re­quire­ments. The prob­lem is­n’t the filesys­tem as a per­sis­tence layer. The prob­lem is peo­ple treat­ing CLAUDE.md like a 2,000-word on­board­ing doc­u­ment in­stead of a con­cise set of con­straints. Which brings us to the ques­tion of stan­dards.

Right now we have CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, copi­lot-in­struc­tions.md, .cursorrules, and prob­a­bly five more by the time you read this. Everyone agrees that agents need per­sis­tent filesys­tem-based con­text. Nobody agrees on what the file should be called or what should go in it. I see ef­forts to con­sol­i­date, this is good.

Dan Abramov’s piece on a so­cial filesys­tem crys­tal­lized some­thing im­por­tant here. He de­scribes how the AT Protocol treats user data as files in a per­sonal repos­i­tory; struc­tured, owned by the user, read­able by any app that speaks the for­mat. The crit­i­cal de­sign choice is that dif­fer­ent apps don’t need to agree on what a post” is. They just need to name­space their for­mats (using do­main names, like Java pack­ages) so they don’t col­lide. Apps are re­ac­tive to files. Every ap­p’s data­base be­comes de­rived data i.e. a cached ma­te­ri­al­ized view of every­body’s fold­ers.

The same ten­sion ex­ists in the agent con­text file space. We don’t need CLAUDE.md and AGENTS.md and copi­lot-in­struc­tions.md to con­verge into one file. We need them to co­ex­ist with­out col­li­sion. And to be fair, some con­ver­gence is hap­pen­ing. Anthropic re­leased Agent Skills as an open stan­dard, a SKILL.md for­mat that Microsoft, OpenAI, Atlassian, GitHub, and Cursor have all adopted. A skill you write for Claude Code works in Codex, works in Copilot. The file for­mat is the API.

NanoClaw, a light­weight per­sonal AI as­sis­tant frame­work, takes this to its log­i­cal con­clu­sion. Instead of build­ing an ever-ex­pand­ing fea­ture set, it uses a skills over fea­tures” model. Want Telegram sup­port? There’s no Telegram mod­ule. There’s a /add-telegram skill, es­sen­tially a mark­down file that teaches Claude Code how to rewrite your in­stal­la­tion to add the in­te­gra­tion. Skills are just files. They’re portable, au­ditable, and com­pos­able. No MCP server re­quired. No plu­gin mar­ket­place to browse. Just a folder with a SKILL.md in it.

This is in­ter­op­er­abil­ity with­out co­or­di­na­tion. And I want to be spe­cific about what I mean by that, be­cause it’s a strong claim. In tech, get­ting two com­pet­ing prod­ucts to work to­gether usu­ally re­quires ei­ther a for­mal stan­dard that takes years to rat­ify, or a dom­i­nant plat­form that forces com­pat­i­bil­ity. Files side­step both. If two apps can read mark­down, they can share con­text. If they both un­der­stand the SKILL.md for­mat, they can share ca­pa­bil­i­ties. Nobody had to sign a part­ner­ship agree­ment. Nobody had to at­tend a stan­dards body meet­ing. The file for­mat does the co­or­di­nat­ing.

There’s a use­ful anal­ogy from in­fra­struc­ture. Traditional data ar­chi­tec­tures were de­signed around the as­sump­tion that stor­age was the bot­tle­neck. The CPU waited for data from mem­ory or disk, and com­pu­ta­tion was es­sen­tially re­ac­tive to what­ever stor­age made avail­able. But as pro­cess­ing power out­paced stor­age I/O, the par­a­digm shifted. The in­dus­try moved to­ward de­cou­pling stor­age and com­pute, let­ting each scale in­de­pen­dently, which is how we ended up with ar­chi­tec­tures like S3 plus ephemeral com­pute clus­ters. The bot­tle­neck moved, and every­thing re­or­ga­nized around the new con­straint.

Something sim­i­lar is hap­pen­ing with AI agents. The bot­tle­neck is­n’t model ca­pa­bil­ity or com­pute. It’s con­text. Models are smart enough. They’re just for­get­ful. And filesys­tems, for all their sim­plic­ity, are an in­cred­i­bly ef­fec­tive way to man­age per­sis­tent con­text at the ex­act point where the agent runs — on the de­vel­op­er’s ma­chine, in their en­vi­ron­ment, with their data al­ready there.

Now, I’d be a frawd if I did­n’t ac­knowl­edge the ten­sion here. Someone on Twitter joked that all of you say­ing you don’t need a graph for agents while us­ing the filesys­tem are just in de­nial about us­ing a graph.” And… they’re not wrong. A filesys­tem is a tree struc­ture. Directories, sub­di­rec­to­ries, files i.e. a di­rected acyclic graph. When your agent runs ls, grep, reads a file, fol­lows a ref­er­ence to an­other file, it’s tra­vers­ing a graph.

Richmond in Oracle’s piece made the sharpest dis­tinc­tion I’ve seen: filesys­tems are win­ning as an in­ter­face, data­bases are win­ning as a sub­strate. The mo­ment you want con­cur­rent ac­cess, se­man­tic search at scale, dedu­pli­ca­tion, re­cency weight­ing — you end up build­ing your own in­dexes. Which is, let’s be hon­est, ba­si­cally a data­base.

Having worked at Weaviate, I can tell you that this is­n’t an ei­ther/​or sit­u­a­tion. The file in­ter­face is pow­er­ful be­cause it’s uni­ver­sal and LLMs al­ready un­der­stand it. The data­base sub­strate is pow­er­ful be­cause it pro­vides the guar­an­tees you need when things get real. The in­ter­est­ing fu­ture is­n’t files ver­sus data­bases. It’s files as the in­ter­face hu­mans and agents in­ter­act with, backed by what­ever sub­strate makes sense for the use case.

Here’s my ac­tual take on all of this, the thing I think peo­ple are danc­ing around but not say­ing di­rectly.

Filesystems can re­de­fine what per­sonal com­put­ing means in the age of AI.

Not in the everything runs lo­cally” sense (but maybe?). In the sense that your data, your con­text, your pref­er­ences, your skills, your mem­ory — lives in a for­mat you own, that any agent can read, that is­n’t locked in­side a spe­cific ap­pli­ca­tion. Your aboutme.md works with your flavour of OpenClaw/NanoClaw to­day and what­ever comes to­mor­row. Your skills files are portable. Your pro­ject con­text per­sists across tools.

This is what per­sonal com­put­ing was sup­posed to be be­fore every­thing moved into walled-gar­den SaaS apps and pro­pri­etary data­bases. Files are the orig­i­nal open pro­to­col. And now that AI agents are be­com­ing the pri­mary in­ter­face to com­put­ing, files are be­com­ing the in­ter­op­er­abil­ity layer that makes it pos­si­ble to switch tools, com­pose work­flows, and main­tain con­ti­nu­ity across ap­pli­ca­tions, all with­out any­one’s per­mis­sion.

I’ll ad­mit this is a bit ide­al­is­tic. The his­tory of open for­mats is lit­tered with stan­dards that won on pa­per and lost in prac­tice. Companies have strong in­cen­tives to make their con­text files just dif­fer­ent enough that switch­ing costs re­main high. The fact that we al­ready have CLAUDE.md and AGENTS.md and .cursorrules co­ex­ist­ing rather than one uni­ver­sal for­mat, is ev­i­dence that frag­men­ta­tion is the de­fault, not the ex­cep­tion. And the ETH Zürich pa­per is a re­minder that even when the for­mat ex­ists, writ­ing good con­text files is harder than it sounds. Most peo­ple will write bad ones, and bad con­text files are ap­par­ently worse than none at all.

But I keep com­ing back to some­thing Dan Abramov wrote: our mem­o­ries, our thoughts, our de­signs should out­live the soft­ware we used to cre­ate them. That’s not a tech­ni­cal ar­gu­ment. It’s a val­ues ar­gu­ment. And it’s one that the filesys­tem, for all its age and sim­plic­ity, is uniquely po­si­tioned to serve. Not be­cause it’s the best tech­nol­ogy. But be­cause it’s the one tech­nol­ogy that al­ready be­longs to you.

...

Read the original on madalitso.me »

10 186 shares, 11 trendiness

Tinnitus Is Somehow Connected to a Crucial Bodily Function

Those who have never en­dured the re­lent­less ring­ing of tin­ni­tus can only dream of the tor­ment. In fact, a bad dream may be the clos­est some get to ex­pe­ri­enc­ing any­thing like it.

The sub­jec­tive sound, which can also be a hiss­ing, buzzing, or click­ing, is heard by no one else, and it may be pre­sent con­stantly, or may come and go.

Neuroscientists at the University of Oxford now sus­pect that sleep and tin­ni­tus are closely in­ter­twined in the brain.

Their find­ings hint at a fun­da­men­tal re­la­tion­ship be­tween the two con­di­tions — one that has, sur­pris­ingly, been over­looked in the brain un­til very re­cently.

What first made me and my col­leagues cu­ri­ous were the re­mark­able par­al­lels be­tween tin­ni­tus and sleep,” neu­ro­sci­en­tist Linus Milinski at Oxford’s Sleep and Circadian Neuroscience Institute told ScienceAlert.

Tinnitus is a de­bil­i­tat­ing med­ical con­di­tion, whereas sleep is a nat­ural state we en­ter reg­u­larly, yet both ap­pear to rely on spon­ta­neous brain ac­tiv­ity. Because there is still no ef­fec­tive treat­ment for sub­jec­tive tin­ni­tus, I be­lieve that ex­plor­ing these sim­i­lar­i­ties might of­fer new ways to un­der­stand and even­tu­ally treat phan­tom per­cepts.”

Watch the video be­low for a sum­mary of the study:

A phantom per­cept’ is when our brains fool us into think­ing we are see­ing, hear­ing, feel­ing, or smelling some­thing that is not there, phys­i­cally speak­ing.

Many peo­ple ex­pe­ri­ence phan­tom per­cepts only dur­ing sleep, but for about 15 per­cent of the world’s pop­u­la­tion, an in­escapable noise rings in their ears dur­ing wak­ing hours, too.

Tinnitus is the world’s most com­mon phan­tom per­cept, and yet there is no known cause or cure, de­spite a long list of hy­pothe­ses.

While many in­di­vid­u­als with tin­ni­tus re­port poor sleep and show poor sleep pat­terns, the po­ten­tial con­nec­tion to this cru­cial bod­ily func­tion has only re­cently come to light.

In 2022, Milinski led a re­view, which the au­thors claim is the first to con­sider, at a func­tional level, how sleep might im­pact tin­ni­tus, and vice versa.

The Oxford re­searchers pro­posed that the large spon­ta­neous waves of brain ac­tiv­ity that oc­cur dur­ing deep sleep, or non-rapid eye move­ment sleep (non-REM), might sup­press the brain ac­tiv­ity that leads to tin­ni­tus.

To test that idea, the team turned to fer­rets, which have a sim­i­lar au­di­tory sys­tem to hu­mans. In ex­per­i­ments pub­lished in 2024, re­searchers found that fer­rets that de­vel­oped more se­vere tin­ni­tus also showed dis­rupted sleep.

We could ac­tu­ally see these sleep prob­lems ap­pear at the same time as tin­ni­tus af­ter noise ex­po­sure,” Milinski told ScienceAlert. This sug­gested, for the first time, a clear link be­tween de­vel­op­ing tin­ni­tus and dis­rupted sleep.”

Crucially, the fer­rets that de­vel­oped tin­ni­tus showed overly re­spon­sive brain ac­tiv­ity to sound. When the fer­rets fi­nally did man­age to slip into non-REM sleep, that hy­per­ac­tiv­ity was damp­ened.

This sug­gests that sleep may tem­porar­ily mask the ef­fects of tin­ni­tus by en­gag­ing the same brain cir­cuits.

Our find­ings in­di­cate that deep sleep may in­deed help mit­i­gate tin­ni­tus and could re­veal nat­ural brain mech­a­nisms for mod­u­lat­ing ab­nor­mal ac­tiv­ity,” said Milinski.

Research on non-hu­man an­i­mals has its ob­vi­ous lim­i­ta­tions, but the same sort of brain ac­tiv­ity pat­terns may ex­ist in hu­mans, too.

Since their 2022 re­view, Milinski says the field has rapidly ex­panded, with a grow­ing num­ber of large-scale stud­ies in­ves­ti­gat­ing how sleep, the en­vi­ron­ment, and tin­ni­tus in­ter­act — and not just in fer­rets.

I hope this re­search will lead to greater aware­ness of tin­ni­tus and open new ways of ex­plor­ing treat­ments,” Milinski told ScienceAlert.

Acknowledging the im­pact of tin­ni­tus, es­pe­cially in older adults, where hear­ing loss and tin­ni­tus can in­crease iso­la­tion and con­tribute to men­tal health prob­lems, is in­cred­i­bly im­por­tant.”

Just last year, a study from China found that in­di­vid­u­als with tin­ni­tus were less able to sup­press the hy­per­ac­tiv­ity of their awake brains as they tran­si­tioned into a sleep state.

During deep sleep, how­ever, the hy­per­ac­tiv­ity linked to tin­ni­tus was sup­pressed.

This study es­tab­lishes sleep as a crit­i­cal ther­a­peu­tic tar­get to in­ter­rupt the 24-hour dys­func­tional cy­cle of tin­ni­tus,” the au­thors con­clude, led by Xiaoyu Bao of South China University of Technology.

At Oxford, Milinski and his col­leagues are now fo­cus­ing on how sleep may af­fect the de­vel­op­ment of tin­ni­tus.

Tinnitus can make sleep worse, and poor sleep may, in turn, make tin­ni­tus worse. It may be a kind of vi­cious cir­cle, al­though I do not be­lieve it is un­break­able,” spec­u­lated Milinski.

When we do not sleep well, we be­come more vul­ner­a­ble to stress, and stress is one of the strongest fac­tors known to worsen tin­ni­tus. Stress can even trig­ger tin­ni­tus to be­gin with.”

Further re­search could not only lead to ef­fec­tive tin­ni­tus treat­ments but also help sci­en­tists bet­ter un­der­stand the mys­ter­ies of sleep it­self.

The 2022 re­view was pub­lished in Brain Communications.

An ear­lier ver­sion of this ar­ti­cle was pub­lished in November 2025.

...

Read the original on www.sciencealert.com »

To add this web app to your iOS home screen tap the share button and select "Add to the Home Screen".

10HN is also available as an iOS App

If you visit 10HN only rarely, check out the the best articles from the past week.

If you like 10HN please leave feedback and share

Visit pancik.com for more.