3,975 karma · joined March 23, 2015
https://youtube.com/watch?v=1YW_6OXYB7E
It's like the people who attack grammar in arguments instead of the core point. I've seen enough people doing this across the Internet to know the reason they do it. And it has everything to do with being a smug asshole and nothing to do with helping.
The reason thrusters work well in space is minimal weight there. You need to work many times harder on Earth to counter act the weight of the object here.
If you read what gwern says on nicotine its far more nuanced than "nicotine is fine, use nicotine." He does acknowledge that frequent use leads to tolerance. But tolerance is not the same as addiction. I think also if you're going to try argue against his post (which is thoroughly researched) then you ought to do better than just set up a strawman and say he's wrong....
While I do not have a crystal ball, I believe this is a temporary rather than permanent situation."
Yep, any day now people will stop using AI and all the jobs will come back. Of course the author believes this if they're a professor. If students didn't think they had a job they wouldn't want to study comp sci and there would be no reason for professor for it, either. Even though they have a kid doing comp sci, gotta call them out of touch if they're not steering away that choice given what tech is today...
I assume he's in an area with thousands of police like in a big city or something. Would you be safer in smaller towns against this threat or what? It's scary that essentially anyone who can find your address can do this kind of thing. Even though the penalties are severe if you get caught. The bold always find a way...
Honestly, you all kind of mind fuck me that you're not more pissed off about AI basically replicating a large portion of your skills. This effects so many professions now and it's only going to get worse. I would expect a far greater outcry from software engineers trying to organise to ban this shit. But its like none of you even care?
I've seen this play out over and over. Companies that work on incredibly sensitive subjects don't put security first. It's like just something where you "audit it" at the end. All the while, you're just duct taping a bunch of half-working shit together so you can "ship" as fast as possible. Got to get that "traction" in, amiright guise? If customers money gets lost or a bunch of other bullshit happens that's a problem for tomorrow.
The simplest possible approach is to install the runtime on a users computer, isolated, with the package inside it. It's wasteful in terms of disk space but can be generalised to build reusable installers that work for just about any language.
Reusable installers
A reusable installer reads its own meta-data to decide on the runtime to install and the project. Linux and Mac are supported through a bash script while all windows versions use an NSIS program. The unusual thing about this is once you build the reusable installers since it's just meta-data everything can be edited inside the browser without compiling new binaries.
Like TiddlyWiki: You can actually download this entire system as a single HTML page to create installers without ever needing a server. Though Github project support only works online at the moment (not a limitation, haven't added this feature yet.)
Edit: thanks HNers for checking out my project. I am actually really excited about it. I know installers aren't exactly the most exciting topic but I thought you would all appreciate a different take on it.
I don't really get the hate. Everyone here uses AI for just about everything yet they almost never credit the models. I think this misrepresents the work so I credited the tools. But I'm by no means just handing a blank script to a model and hoping for the best.