BakedCatboy

My first guess would be that those nodes had a poor GPS lock and are actually much closer. Unless you've received multiple reports from them where the location is about the same (better if it changes a little bit so you know they're not just retransmitting the same inaccurate position because they can't get a good GPS lock), in which case some spooky rf stuff is probably happening.

That seems kind of like pointing to reverse engineering communities and saying that binaries are the preferred format because of how much they can do. Sure you can modify finished models a lot, but what you can do with just pre trained weights vs being able to replicate the final training or changing training parameters is just an entirely different beast.

There's a reason why the OSI stipulates that code and parameters used to train is considered part of the "source" that should be released in order to count as an open source model.

You're free to disagree with me and the OSI though, it's not like there's 1 true authority on what open source means. If a game that is highly modifiable and moddable despite the source code not being available counts as open source to you because there are entire communities successfully modding it, then all the more power to you.

It's worth noting that OpenR1 have themselves said that DeepSeek didn't release any code for training the models, nor any of the crucial hyperparameters used. So even if you did have suitable training data, you wouldn't be able to replicate it without re-discovering what they did.

OSI specifically makes a carve-out that allows models to be considered "open source" under their open source AI definition without providing the training data, so when it comes to AI, open source is really about providing the code that kicks off training, checkpoints if used, and details about training data curation so that a comparable dataset can be compiled for replicating the results.

It really comes down to this part of the "Open Source" definition:

The source code [released] must be the preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program

A compiled binary is not the format in which a programmer would prefer to modify the program - it's much preferred to have the text file which you can edit in a text editor. Just because it's possible to reverse engineer the binary and make changes by patching bytes doesn't make it count. Any programmer would much rather have the source file instead.

Similarly, the released weights of an AI model are not easy to modify, and are not the "preferred format" that the internal programmers use to make changes to the AI mode. They typically are making changes to the code that does the training and making changes to the training dataset. So for the purpose of calling an AI "open source", the training code and data used to produce the weights are considered the "preferred format", and is what needs to be released for it to really be open source. Internal engineers also typically use training checkpoints, so that they can roll back the model and redo some of the later training steps without redoing all training from the beginning - this is also considered part of the preferred format if it's used.

OpenR1, which is attempting to recreate R1, notes: No training code was released by DeepSeek, so it is unknown which hyperparameters work best and how they differ across different model families and scales.

I would call "open weights" models actually just "self hostable" models instead of open source.

Damn, it looks really tempting with the return to low profile camera bumps, but I fear that my fingers will not forgive me if I upgrade to yet another bigger phone - for the third time. Each time I tell myself, this will be the last time I get something larger and I will put my foot down and only upgrade to same size or smaller from now on. And I feel like a fool every time I give in.

I think it's normal to see some variation, I have an official Google replacement battery from ifixit, the marked capacity on the battery is 4050, in battery settings it says the design capacity is 4180, and my current capacity is 4042. Also accubattery says the design capacity is 4000.

If you're worried I would use something like accubattery and let it take measurements for a week (while trying to discharge down to a few percent a couple times and also charging uninterrupted to 100%) and then see if the estimated battery capacity measures up to what you expect. If you get close to or above 4000 (would make it about 90%) then I think it should be fine. If it's much less, then think about having it replaced.

No problem! You can tell I went deep down the rabbithole a while back lol - I had to rip my dad's CD collection and assure him that what came out of the toslink to his DAC was identical coming from a FLAC as would come from a CD player with optical out.

I'm pretty sure it's per year, it's been a while since I looked at tuitions but the in / out of state tuitions for my school (8k and 33k) match what they list on the schools website for a full academic year for in and out of state students.

That's just tuition so it doesn't include cost of the dorm (8k), meal plans (5 or 6k depending on the level), and books (estimated $700), among other fees and stuff.

That sounds like a treatment we should pre-approve of

I'm pretty sure if you rip CDs directly to FLAC, it's a perfect copy assuming you're using good software. PCM isn't lossy or lossless because it's not a compressed format, it's an uncompressed bitstream. Think of it like the original data. If it was burned to a CD as digital MP3 data and then ripped that to FLAC, then yes you'd be going from lossy compressed to lossless, which would hide the fact that quality was lost when it went to MP3 in the first place.

Just as an example, you can rip a CD directly to FLAC (you should also find and use the correct sample offset for your CD drive), rip the cue sheet for track alignment, then burn the FLAC back to a new CD using the cuesheet (and the correct write offset configuration), and you'll get a CD with the exact bit for bit pattern of "pits" burned into the data layer.

You can then rip both CDs to a raw uncompressed wav file (wav is basically just a container for PCM data) and then you'll be able to MD5sum both wav files and see that they are identical.

This is how I test my FLAC rips to make sure I'm preserving everything. This is also how CD checksum databases (like CDDB) work - people across the globe can rip to wav or flac and because it's the same master of the CD, they'll get identical checksums, and even after converting the PCM/wav into a flac you are still able to checksum and verify it's identical bit for bit.

Some have different tuition for if you're in state or from out of state, so around 10K usually for in state and around 20K for out of state, but some are 30K to 60K for the fancier universities in my state.

I basically don't notice that I don't have a headphone jack. My usb-c adapter is just permanently affixed to my wired IEMs and it basically makes no difference to me if the plug is round or usb-c shaped.

I definitely recommend biting the bullet and getting a good adapter. Since I have a pixel I use the Google one. I made sure my partner got an official apple one for their iPhone since I remember seeing rumors about a volume difference between them if mixed and matched. Aside from Apple shenanigans I haven't really had an issue with them. I also only charge at night so I never have the problem of needing to charge and listen at the same time.