First time I hear about oil shell. Funny name, but that aside, I have a hard time taking a shell seriously that started out written in python. They describe it as having "python-like types", interesting. And they say it's a shell targeted at people who "write scripts, which may get into the hundreds or even thousands of lines" rather than end-users. If you write complex scripts, please use a proper language. Also, I've been writing "complex" bash scripts since ages, and of course it can be somewhat annoying with bash's quirks. But it runs almost everywhere without extra dependencies, which is the main reason I use it. If I had to install oil on all machines running my scripts, why wouldn't I go ahead and use rather go and distribute binaries? Well, my guess is this will never catch on.
(sarcastic take on the article) Well, thank god it can only be used for Russian or Chinese disinformation. We just need to ban anything Russian or Chinese and we are safe! Do avoid mass outrage among our own western population, we can facilitate tools like ChatGPT to make it appear there's a broad consensus among the population for these measures, and to automatically attack all criticism with consistent talking points. Democracy is saved!
I keep seeing artist use acrylic paint, such a blatant rip off of long established art styles. This has to stop.
EDIT: let me take this opportunity to also point out how better copyright enforcement could have saved us from the likes of this fraud Picasso, who just ripped off the style of Braque
Sorry, I did not check the repo itself, I don't think I even have a cvs client anymore. On the linked page there's a section prominently placed, titled "Latest News". If you check there, the latest of such news is titled "A first Lush 2.0 beta is out!" with a date of 2009-10-19.
Hm, that was the whole point of my argument I believe. That this is an inherent left-leaning position, regardless of who is subscribing to it; possibly because in the discussion on how to handle such healthcare, it defends the social and idealistic dimension ("left") rather than the self-responsible and pessimistic perspective ("right"). Now we can argue about political relativism and that no position is inherently and objectively "left" or "right" and it only depends on who articulates that position - and as you might have guessed this is an idea that I am slightly opposed to. Of course we can start with the Overton window and shifting beliefs and the possibility than in a century from now on, universal healthcare might be considered, for whatever reason, a hardcore right-wing extremist position.
Typically, if there is no majority in opposition of a position, it is typically referred to as "consensus". I do not understand your argument. Germany has a left-leaning position on health care, historically introduced and defended by left-aligned parties but generally accepted across the spectrum. Just because the far right does not want to abolish socialized health care does not make it a center position, at least that is the argument I am trying to make
So a consensus position is by definition center? So (democratic) countries can't lean to either side of the spectrum because by definition their positions are supported by the majority, and thus a center position?
Can you give me an example of such a position? I would argue that, for example, social programs in Europe are more popular, but still following a left-leaning position that is just more broadly accepted
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that the same positions would count as "center" in Europe while "left" in the US? And what would be an example of a "large hierarchical structure" without a clear "outside"?
What a weird argument. I guess you also don't use encryption ever because authoritarian governments can just extort the keys from you. Somehow I doubt you grew up in an USSR country or ever cared about the life back then in more detail
This page states it was introduced with 1.7, which was released a long time ago (maybe 2 years?) and it's still in prototype stage since. I have never used it since then, and given how bad the less popular parts of PyTorch tend to be, I'd be reluctant to even trying. Quickly checking I see some active development going on there still, however. I guess mostly to get stuff on Android
Almost more interesting in that article I found that Sama, the Kenyan company, was also asked to collect CP and brutal/gore images for OpenAI. After delivering 1400 images, Sama cancelled the contract as this was even too much for them. OpenAI then talked about "miscommunication" and they actually did not really want those CP images. Well, they made its own category for it and asked Sama to collect images of several other categories, but somehow it was lost in communication that for one of theses categories, no images should be collected. Because they are illegal. OpenAI swears they never opened the images they received (and paid for).
Doesn't apply to the JPL folks I've met throughout my life but for the rest I guess I have to take your word for it. I'm not sure if your comment was just a sarcastic joke though, in which case I completely missed it
Looks like somebody is _really_ running a campaign against gas. It's fine if you like induction, like it's fine if you like Apple products. Just leave me alone about it, will you?
I usually assume OpenAI is actually Microsoft already, as they are one of the lead investors and from what I've heard quite involved there. It's kind of a trick to appear "open" and not tainted by the Microsoft brand but in the end it's Microsoft already
Acceleration does not make accidents more likely (well, technically, without the ability to accelerate, it'll be impossible to have a car crash, I guess?). Risky behavior makes accidents more likely. Not being able to control your machinery and still trying to push it to its limits makes accidents more likely. Here the problem is people who behave anti-social and ego-centrical. But that's behavior we like to generally encourage and then fix it by adding regulations around the most stupid things.
Such regulation could not be enforced just because it would be hugely impractical to measure and monitor. That aside, I don't understand your problem with it
Take an emulator of a platform of your choice and work your way to have it display something that you like it to display without booting any existing image before
The problem is that everyone is aware of this, which in turn makes the threat useless - because if everyone agrees that its primary purpose is to scare and not to be used, nobody is scared anymore. This can only be countered by increasing the threat, and there are not so many ways to do it. So we are still quite close to having dramatic consequences that are not primarily intended but more the consequence of still ultimately ignoring the gravity of this all
If I want to do bitwise operations on an integer, and I want to set/mask the MSB (maybe it's just a bitfield for me), I mask with INT_NAN? That also sounds very weird
I don't really understand it, wouldn't this just trade the checks and corner cases you have to pay attention to with different set of corner cases? If I have an integer that can approach INT_MIN, I know I have to pay attention to overflows when using it and this proposal helps with at most some fraction of the problems that can arise. And what's the great benefit, that it get's a bit more "elegant"? If you want to write "safe" software and have the compiler enforce it, go use Rust/Ada/Spark instead.