Volundr

I'm using it to mean someone who doesn't have a place to live. Like say someone who just sold their house and didn't go and use that money to buy a different house. Yes, that's very different than the person asking for change on the street corner, but I thought it was pretty clear from context which I'd be.

> We've conflated having a home with a financial asset.

And it's a really, really shitty one. My house has roughly doubled in value since I bought it, but in practice that's useless to me. I can't claim that value without rendering myself homeless. If anything it reduces my mobility by making it harder to move, since I really need to coordinate the sale of my current home with buying the new one to help absorb that $500k or whatever price tag.

My if house prices dropped by 50% or more drops my net worth on paper, but it doesn't actually change anything. I still have a place to live + my savings, investments, etc.

> now I have joined the majority of the population and will no longer cast my vote.

>then they are just disenfranchising a different group of people, me.

"They" aren't disenfranchising you, you are disenfranchising you. You have the same access to vote you always did, your just choosing not to exercise it.

No, I said exactly the opposite. My exact words:

> I wish he'd sign that executive order and tilt that windmill in the courts instead of the stuff he is pushing.

You say you were very clear, but I genuinely don't understand what about that you disagree with.

I'm not sure what your saying here? Trump lies so you'd rather his energy be spent on ICE raids, ending birthright citizenship, and illegal tarrifs than ending daylight savings? Personally I'd rather the latter but you do you.

Trump's said he wants to end it. That's something I'd back him on. I wish he'd sign that executive order and tilt that windmill in the courts instead of the stuff he is pushing. I'd be rooting for him!

I guess it's "only" 40 years, but my 1985 Civic was an amazing car. Definitely not a death trap, but after I did end selling it for a 99 Acura with airbags. Still kind of regret that one. My house was built in 1970, it's enough for the two of use, but would admittedly be cramped for more. That said at 850 square feet, it's quite a bit smaller than the 1,400 average for 1970.

https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/real-estate-...

How do I know the time zone of an integer? Sure there are plenty of cases where one doesn't care, but there are also many cases where the original time zone is important.

I mean if we're being pedantic, unless there's something I missed the regulation you linked above only deals with shifting out of park, not starting the vehicle, but point taken, either Toyota has been flagrantly skirting regulations for a decade, or his car won't move without first depressing the brake (I don't think Toyota was making manual Rav4s that late, but haven't researched). I actually don't think my Accura will let me do it either (without putting a key in the bypass), but I'm not quite motivated enough to go out and check. My Baja is manual and would have no problem.

> Quantified, "plenty of cars" is not a number.

I mean did it need to be one? Unless you think I'm the only person whose managed to keep a car running over ~20 years the fact that we're around is enough to make it plausible we're talking a car predating them. But since your curious, it looks like ~40% of the cars on the road are from before 2010.

https://hedgescompany.com/blog/2024/02/average-age-of-cars-t...

Yes, my riding lawnmower manual also tells me not to clear debris from the blade while the mower is running. Yet somehow I don't think the mower will stop if I do.

I don't know if this model has a brake interlock on the ignition or not, but the fact that it's part of the instructions for starting the vehicle doesn't imply the presence of one.

My 2006 Baja and 99 Acura Integra both don't have one. My 2024 Ioniq however will start in "accessory mode". There are plenty of cars on the road today that don't.

Bears don't like well seasoned hikers?

The article keeps saying he was arrested for going a few seconds over, which is weird because it also contains this statement:

"Feary then notified police to have Blanchard removed. I informed Blanchard that he was asked to leave and needed to do so. Blanchard then continued to the front of the room where counselors sat behind a table and insisted on giving them paperwork,” according to the police report. “Sergeant Singer then directed me to place Blanchard under arrest for trespassing. Blanchard was placed in handcuffs, escorted from the property, and transported to Rogers County Jail."

The video seems to back up that account, showing him being told he needs to leave, and him instead walking to the front with paperwork, before finally being arrested.

To be clear I don't think this justifies the charges, but it's weird the article repeatedly frames it like he just went a couple second over and was immediately slapped in cuffs, marched out and charged.

Reply in thread from Bunny: https://old.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1sglytg/bunnycdn_ha...

> Did I say my Claw (not Open) doesn't have internet access?

> My email filtering system surfaces only the mails that are relevant right now - I can check the rest later.

So then you have not actually addressed the concerns expressed in my post. You indeed have an LLM with both email access and Internet access. Exactly the scenario I described. The amount of trouble those two accesses together can cause is huge.

> None of these require an LLM to have free rein to modify things for me.

Give me read access to your email and an Internet connection and I bet I can come up with all sorts of ways to modify things for you. So can an LLM. If your lucky it won't.

So what do you do with your OpenClaw instance that has read-only access to your email and no Internet access?

Like what?

Ignoring that you've just cut off a whole vector of usefulness, how do I keep it from exfilling my inbox to the Internet in response to a malicious email? Or using its access to take control of my online accounts?

Honest question, this kind of stuff is what keeps me from using it.

What I find crazy is the sheer amount of access and trust involved in these LLMs. Every time I think about something I might like to do with it, I think about the amount of damage the LLM could do, e.x. even with read only access to my email combined with Internet access, and nope out. It's wild to me anyone trusts these things unsupervised.

GitHub is cagey about the criteria, but yes this is ongoing. It doesn't appear to be tied to active contributions though. I'm a maintainer on paper of a moderately large open source project that I haven't been involved with in years, and they still renew my free copilot monthly.

I don't think they did, they said machine translation is considered AI, that is, it's the subset of things that are AI. Not that they are one and the same.

Here you go: https://web.archive.org/web/20200929085743/https://en.wikipe...

Admittedly I don't think this uses the term AI, but "deep learning" and "artificial neural network" are indeed AI, and if you follow those links in the Wikipedia article you will indeed find them described as such.

> An agent, named Adi, would pay me $110 to deliver a bouquet of flowers to Anthropic, as a special thanks for developing Claude, its chatbot.

> This wasn’t mentioned in the listing, but the name of an AI startup was featured at the bottom of the note I was supposed to deliver with the flowers.

The job was presented as delivering flower as a thank you, but instead was a marketing stunt. Unless you think the AI just spontaneously decided to sign it's thank you note with a random unaffiliated AI startups name.

If a job you apply for a job and it turns out it's not what it's advertised to be, there's nothing unethical in declining the job. The fact that the platform doesn't have a way of saying "nevermind thanks, not what I signed up for" is not the authors fault.

They were explicitly looking to do work for an AI, when it turned out to be a human driven marketing stunt they declined.

Pension? Why should you get paid not to work just because your 80 and have given your whole life to the company? Geez some people have no work ethic.

I'm up to several hundred. How is Zendesk this bad at email? Basic anti-abuse should be able to prevent this kind of flood. Simple rate limiting. God damn. For now I'm dropping everything with a Zendesk header. God help any non technical user whose a target.

The statement was made to point out that this is an example where a phone number is enough metadata to to problematic for privacy. It stands on its own. It doesn't need more context or purpose.

I mean agree to disagree I guess. If the government was modifying photos to make seemingly innocuous changes to the weather I would have a lot of questions as to why and would indeed hope that someone would report on it.

This. Everything your LLM reads from your database, server, whatever is being sent to your LLM provider. Unless your LLM is local running on your own systems, it shouldn't be given ANY access to production data without vetting it through legal with an eye to your privacy policy and compliance requirements.

> Logging is a factor too. Windows logging tends to be "nothing" or "tsunami" with not a lot in between

You forgot mysterious GUID that shows up on exactly one forum post on the Internet with no solution.