I don't have an axe to grind, but this story piqued my interest. So here's some more context:
- SunJun8's original issue text is still available at the linked issue. The gist is that Nous Research's Hermes appears derivative of (or heavily inspired by) EvoMap's Evolver (https://github.com/EvoMap/evolver), but without attribution.
- Issues #17688 and #27266 repeat this request for attribution.
- teknium1 retitled the original issue to "." and edited the issue text to "."
- Nous Research deleted comments from 4 users, including the issue submitter, and blocked all of them.
- No formal response has been given by teknium or the Nous Research project. It appears they are trying their darndest to brush it under the rug.
Plagiarism is bad, even in the age of AI, whether perpetrated by SV or China. If credit is due, give it. Else, all it costs you is your credibility. If credit is not due, make an official statement as such. It's absurd to take (seemingly valid) criticism and sloppily paint over it.
I guess I had never considered at face value what that kind of arrangement means until reading this DOJ document.
It makes total sense to me that committing terrible crimes should be punishable. When a criminal per domestic law resides in a different country (and the issue crosses national borders), it seems to me (not a lawyer) that the determination of appropriate force must be decided by an international group.
Otherwise, what's chilling to me is... what stops a country from unilaterally abducting anyone they want? The country doing the abducting determines the laws that have been violated, after all. In this document, we've explicitly determined that international law has no bearing on domestic consequences. So do whatever you want, so to speak. Freaky stuff.
It's surreal to read written arguments defending an "extraordinary rendition" using the military in terms of domestic criminal cases. And to so plainly state that international law ought not apply to the leader of the free world, effectively because we think we can and our interests come first, is distressing. If this is an "arrest" of a "fugitive", to keep with the DOJ analogy, it should be subject to the laws of its jurisdiction. Not the laws of whomever has air superiority.
> ... international law does not prevent [us] ... from ... arrest[ing] individuals [residing in a foreign state] for violations of United States law.
God, that's chilling.
> Congress has declined to amend relevant statutes to deny the Executive the ability to engage in rendition.
> Congress's continued appropriation of funds to the agencies known to engage in the practice should be taken as (at minimum) acquiescence.
So, because our Congress can't pass a bill handed from God himself unless it fills their coffers, we're silently consenting to this baloney?
And I get that legal precedence is a thing, but we shouldn't be looking at military operations in Haiti, or Libya, or Iraq as justification for more international shit-stirring. It's a slippery slope.
Albeit semantics, rebranding to the War Department is not good optics if one intends receive said department's advice before carrying out "a use of force that ... does not rise to the level of war in a constitutional sense". This nonsense is maddening.
> its carcinogenic effects are now well known (no more using it to decaffeinate coffee, degrease engines, or in shaving cream, thankfully!)
I had no idea benzene was used to decaffeinate coffee [1]. Solvent separation makes sense, but I'd never really thought about it. Definitely not a residue I'd want to drink.
From an amateur chemistry perspective, benzene is so fascinating. Benzene rings are one of the first, maybe the very first, structures students learn that don't have fixed, discrete bond counts. That they can be interpreted as a cloud of 1.5-electron bonds between each of the 6 carbons, or alternating double- and single-bonds, makes for some interesting hand analysis of molecules.
> So you must always factor in the amount of time before a predicted crash: the longer it takes the more money you lose.
I think the idea is, as a put buyer (market taker), this has already been baked into the option premium. The only "maintenance cost" in the sense of a cost that adds to an open position is from interest on margin loans.
There would be a maintenance cost from rolling the position into a later expiry, but I think the impression is that this is a precise single bet.
EDIT: You're spot on about opening a position being a sort of cost too, due to missing out on risk-free returns. This is especially important for hedging. Less so for a directional bet.
- SunJun8's original issue text is still available at the linked issue. The gist is that Nous Research's Hermes appears derivative of (or heavily inspired by) EvoMap's Evolver (https://github.com/EvoMap/evolver), but without attribution.
- Issues #17688 and #27266 repeat this request for attribution.
- teknium1 retitled the original issue to "." and edited the issue text to "."
- Nous Research deleted comments from 4 users, including the issue submitter, and blocked all of them.
- No formal response has been given by teknium or the Nous Research project. It appears they are trying their darndest to brush it under the rug.
- EvoMap posted a whole manifesto (https://evomap.ai/blog/hermes-agent-evolver-similarity-analy...) about the similarities.
Plagiarism is bad, even in the age of AI, whether perpetrated by SV or China. If credit is due, give it. Else, all it costs you is your credibility. If credit is not due, make an official statement as such. It's absurd to take (seemingly valid) criticism and sloppily paint over it.