Sanzig

Ideally yes, but we know people don't RTFA - there's a reason that initialism dates back to early Slashdot.

The paraphrase is doing a lot of heavy lifting to convert it to ragebait. Had the OP gone with something like "you didn't vibe code it, you plagiarized Papermark's open source project" (may need some editing to fit under the character limit) it would have at least been more true to the original tweet.

The tweet was fine - it was directly addressing Corgi's claim that they had "vibe coded" DataRoom when they had copied and pasted it from Papermark. The problem is the OP chose to perform a contextectomy on the tweet and make it look like it's making a completely different argument.

Yeah, the title that the OP chose is so sufficiently misleading that I think this one will need to be get changed by the mods. Seitz isn't opining on the ethics of vibe coding in his tweet, he's pointing out that Corgi literally just stole Papermark's AGPL codebase and passed it off as vibe coding.

Same issue in Canada - domestic inference capability for the open models is woefully behind.

There's a blanket statement at the bottom of the pricing page, which I would hope also applies to GLM-5.2:

> Where are models hosted?

> Ollama hosts models and compute resources primarily in the United States. To serve global demand, we may route to Europe and Singapore for additional capacity.

> Is my prompt or response data trained on?

> Prompt or response data is never logged or trained on.

> Who does Ollama partner with to host models?

> Ollama collaborates with NVIDIA Cloud Providers (NCPs) to host open models.

> When Ollama partners with providers, we require no logging, no training, and zero data retention policies in place.

Take a look at Ollama Cloud: https://ollama.com/pricing

You get access to a whole bunch of bleeding edge open models including GLM-5.2, Kimi K2.7, DeepSeek 4 Pro, etc. Inference is run on US/SG/EU cloud providers with zero data retention policies. The $20/mo tier is very generous, in my experience.

> It's always a shock to me how opaque most other models are!

This is (unfortunately) by design. The proprietary models hide their reasoning traces so they can't be used for model distillation. Sometimes even when they do show reasoning, it isn't the model's real trace - IIRC, someone was able to demonstrate that Opus' reasoning is usually a summary made with Haiku behind the scenes.

Oh, I wholeheartedly agree! My "bigger problem" statement can be read as "a bigger problem for the US government."

Agreed that you can export-control the closed source models pretty well (although I think the administration is gravely underestimating the long-term damage that will do to the US economy).

The bigger problem will be if someone (such as a Chinese AI lab) releases a Fable/Mythos-class open weight model. That you can't really export control successfully. Sure, you could class it under EAR or ITAR, but that's just going to make using it difficult for American companies, not everyone else. It would be a stupid protectionist measure that would only hurt the US - so I fully anticipate the admin would try it.

It'll depend on what law they're restricting it under. The obvious play would be to put it on the Commerce Control List so it's covered by the EAR (Export Administration Regulations). If so, compliance is pretty well-understood, just a giant pain in the ass that'll pretty much limit use of these models to companies that already have EAR/ITAR compliance offices.

And Canada's hate speech laws are pretty reserved compared to some of their European counterparts. You pretty much have to be an actual goose-stepping Nazi or white robed Klansman to catch a charge.

I don't think that's a particularly charitable read of people's objections with Flock.

If Flock was simply a network of plate readers with some additional computer vision classification features (make, model, colour, vehicle type) which only saved data on vehicles matching an active BOLO, there would be far less concern.

But Flock is not that. It saves a timestamp and location of every single plate it sees. It is a mass surveillance machine, enabling gross privacy violations by collecting and making available to law enforcement movement data on anyone with a car.

Flock also shares data with the federal government, particularly ICE, even when the local PD has specifically signed contracts forbidding the practice. People who may otherwise be comfortable with Flock providing data to their local PD may not be comfortable when that data is handed to the Trump administration.

The CEO calling those who disagree with him "domestic terrorists" is also ample reason to be skeptical of Flock's mission.

Doubtful it will even get that far, the DoJ will simply draft an appropriate fig leaf memo with a predetermined conclusion and the government will simply plow on ahead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_Memos

Claude is most likely a nod to Claude Shannon, father of information theory and an early AI pioneer.

Canada is capped at $5k for noncommercial infringement, and even at that amount it still isn't worth it for the copyright holder to go to court.

It's particularly aggravating with AWS, since they charge for IPv4 addresses yet many of their services aren't IPv6 capable.

Canadian ISPs are also extremely far behind on IPv6. Bell is the largest ISPs in the country and they still don't have IPv6. I'm with one of their wholly owned subsidiaries (EBOX) which offers static /56 allocations, but good luck trying to find anyone in tech support who understands WTF you're talking about.

Why don't you want every device to have a public IP? There seems to be a perception that this is somehow insecure, but the default configuration of any router is to firewall everything. And one small bonus of the huge size of a /64 is that port scanning is not feasible, unlike in the old days when you could trivially scan a whole IPv4 /24 of a company that forgot to configure their firewall.

NAT may work fine for your setup, but it can be a huge headache for some users, especially users on CGNAT. How many years of human effort have gone towards unnecessary NAT workarounds? With IPv6, if you want a peer-to-peer connection between firewalled peers, you do a quick UDP hole punch and you're done - since everything has a unique IP, you don't even need to worry about remapping port numbers.

Your ISP shouldn't be rotating your /64, although unfortunately many do since they are still IPv4-brained when it comes to prefix assignment. Best practice is to assign a static /56 per customer, although admittedly this isn't always followed.

And if you don't need a /48... don't use it? 99.99% of home customers will just automatically use the first /64 in the block, and that's totally fine. There's a ton of address space available, there's no drawback to giving every customer a /56 or even a /48.

> Bandwidth and processing are substantial bottlenecks with SAR; Only targeted and stationary applications have been broadly useful so far, and more focus has been put on planes than satellites for this.

I'm not sure why you assume this, this is factually incorrect. Satellite based SAR has been successfully used for civilian ship detection applications (traffic management, illegal fishing, smuggling detection, etc) for over three decades. I am sure its military use goes back much further.

> SAR is not as simple as taking a static image with a fixed resolution, your sensing window has got a target velocity and distance in mind and the antenna and processing needs to be tuned for that.

No? SAR satellites take thousands of SAR images of stationary scenes every day. It's true that object motion in the scene introduces artifacts, specifically displacement from true position - this is often called the "train off track" phenomenon, as a train moving at speed when viewed with SAR from the right angle will look like it's driving through the adjacent field rather than on the track. However, this isn't a significant problem, and can actually be useful in some situations (eg: looking at how far a ship is deflected from its wake to estimate its speed).

SAR operates in side-looking slant geometry.

Consider shooting a ray at the ocean at an oblique angle from a satellite: it bounces off and scatters away from you. Hardly any of the energy scatters back towards you.

Now, put a ship there. The ray bounces off the surface of the ocean and scatters up into the side of the ship, and from geometry, it's going to bounce off the ship and come straight back towards its original source. You get tons of energy coming back at you.

A ship on the ocean is basically a dihedral corner reflector, which is a very good target for a radar.

> I'm having a hard time imagining a sufficiently high radar resolution for such a wide sensor swath width at such an extreme range. Is the idea that you locate it with the wide sensor swath and then get a detailed radar signature from a more precise sensor?

That's one approach, there are so-called "tip and cue" concepts that do exactly this: a lead satellite will operate in a wide swath mode to detect targets, and then feed them back to a chase satellite which is operating in a high resolution spotlight mode to collect detailed radar images of the target for classification and identification.

However, aircraft carriers are big, so I don't think you'd even need to do the followup spotlight mode for identification. As an example, RADARSAT-2 does 35 meter resolution at a 450 km swath for its ship detection mode. That's plenty to be able to detect and identify an aircraft carrier, and that's a 20 year old civilian mission with public documentation, not a cutting edge military surveillance system. There are concepts for multi-aperture systems that can hit resolutions of less than ten meters at 500 km swath width using digital beamforming, like Germany's HRWS concept.

tl;dr: Radar works very well for this.

Eh, not really. Synthetic Aperture Radar satellites used for marine ship detection have extremely wide sensor swath widths, and ships show up as very bright radar targets against the ocean. Detecting a large ship, even in a very large search area, is almost trivial.

Identifying a ship is harder, but not insurmountable. In particular, large ships like aircraft carriers tend to have very identifiable radar signatures if your resolution is high enough.

Input: the Gettysburg Address.

Output:

87 years ago, our founders launched a disruptive startup on this continent—a new nation built on the core values of liberty and the mission-driven proposition that "all men are created equal."

Right now, we’re facing a major pivot point in a great civil war, testing whether this organization, or any venture with such a strong culture and vision, can truly scale and endure. We’re currently on-site at a key battlefield of this conflict. We’ve gathered here to dedicate a portion of this space as a final resting place for the team members who gave everything to ensure the brand could live on. It’s the right strategic move.

But looking at the bigger picture, we can’t actually "brand" or "consecrate" this ground. The high-performers, both living and dead, who put in the work here have already established its value far beyond our ability to add or detract. The world won't remember our status updates, but it will never forget their execution.

It’s up to us—the remaining stakeholders—to stay dedicated to the massive project ahead of us. We need to take inspiration from these top-tier contributors and double down on the cause they were so passionate about. We are here to resolve that their efforts won't be a sunk cost; that this nation will undergo a digital transformation of freedom; and that a customer-centric government—of the people, by the people, for the people—will never be disrupted out of existence. #Leadership #Vision #Legacy #GrowthMindset

They do, aggressively.

Bunny.net? Doesn't have near the same feature set as Cloudflare, but the essentials are there and you can easily pay as you go with a credit card.

Many countries have solved this with a special background check. In Canada we call this a "vulnerable sector check," [1] and it's usually required for roles such as childcare, education, healthcare, etc. Unlike standard background checks, which do not turn up convictions which have received record suspensions (equivalent to a pardon), these ones do flag cases such as sex offenses, even if a record suspension was issued.

They are only available for vulnerable sectors, you can't ask for one as a convenience store owner vetting a cashier. But if you are employing child care workers in a daycare, you can get them.

This approach balances the need for public safety against the ex-con's need to integrate back into society.

[1] https://rcmp.ca/en/criminal-records/criminal-record-checks/v...

Hardware should be much easier, especially if you get your boards fabbed and assembled at a CM (which you probably should, very few companies have a good reason to move assembly in-house).

All Canadian jurisdictions, as far as I am aware, are at-will employment. Unionized environments are an exception because they have layoff procedures in their collective agreements, but that's the same in the US.

Seems like a very bizarre move, considering Canadian-domiciled corporations have access to very generous financial incentives (SR&ED) at both federal and provincial levels.

Can't help but think this is a move meant to satisfy the US admin.

Spacecraft state vectors.

Well, sure, they won't be thermally random, but they will be significantly perturbed from their nominal orbits, particularly at the lower orbital altitudes.

Solar flares cause atmospheric upwelling, so drag dramatically increases during a major solar flare. And the scenario envisioned in the paper is basically a Carrington-level event, so this effect would be extreme.