All the Middle Eastern oil rich countries seem to be actively avoiding this problem. All are heavily investing in all sorts of different initiatives to diversify their incomes beyond fossil fuels (whether they succeed or not is irrelevant). So, it is not given that a country will suffer from this problem. There has to be a better explanation.
The Gulf countries at the very least employ millions of migrant workers who are generally not entitled to the same level of health and education services and, I would imagine, not counted in these statistics.
Plus if you look at the chart for patents per million tertiary students, UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, are also all in the bottom third so it's not like they're that far ahead.
Russia also employed millions of migrant workers from Central Asia until 2022. Then, risks for them increased, economies in their home countries improved an important outflow if migrants started and continues until now.
> (I'm not saying HN is GDPR compliant though, it's missing a DPO mail address to allow edit/deletion of older PII messages and a privacy policy even though said policy would probably be max 10 lines)
The privacy policy is here [1], linked in the footer. It also very clearly says: "For deletion requests, please contact us at privacy@ycombinator.com.".
I understand why everyone is one Twitter - because people and important people/orgs are there. What I don't understand is, why not also publish the posts on a Mastodon account. You don't have to engage there, but at least don't force people to use Twitter.
In Pakistan Twitter is banned (and blocked by ISPs) because Twitter won't ban the accounts of people/orgs the Pakistani State doesn't like. So, Twitter is not accessible in Pakistan without VPN (which are psuedo banned as well).
Yet, all the politicians (both government and non-government), media personalities, and many state run institutions actively run Twitter accounts. So it is one of the primary ways to understand what they are saying.
Yes, the resulting tensor is incredibly sparse, but still too large to ever be practical for use as anything but the theoretical upper limit on the complexity of a model.
The issue is that while you can remove pretty much all possible interactions for a specific case you have no idea where an interaction could pop up unexpectedly with a huge impact ahead of time.
For the medieval theme the leader of the village may be a cousin of the king which is a very distant but very strong interaction.
This is a perfect example of the limitations of old school social graphs. The number of people you talk to is just the first order effect. What about all the people that people in your company talked to? That has a non zero economic impact on you. Similarly for any other company that your company talks to, and so on and so on.
It scales super exponentially since each person is a member of an arbitrary number of groups and their actions have some non zero impact on each other member of the groups they are a member of, and each individual in each group with a member of which they have interacted with.
reply