I wont claim it works flawlessly, but you don't have to use GDScript or C# to program Godot.
You can also use C++, Go, Java, Typescript, Zig, Scala, Kotlin and Swift: https://github.com/Godot-Languages-Support/godot-lang-suppor...
4,450 karma · joined December 9, 2015
I wont claim it works flawlessly, but you don't have to use GDScript or C# to program Godot.
You can also use C++, Go, Java, Typescript, Zig, Scala, Kotlin and Swift: https://github.com/Godot-Languages-Support/godot-lang-suppor...
The comment I originally replied to makes the claim a human's brain wouldn't have even responded fast enough to register the child was there. That's going WAY further than how Waymo is claiming a human would have responded.
I don't see how that's a more reasonable assumption that a human driver actually being "fully attentive", and I'm not sure Waymo's definition of that term is the same as what you're using.
Not sure where this is coming from, and it's directly contradicted by the article:
> Waymo said in its blog post that its “peer-reviewed model” shows a “fully attentive human driver in this same situation would have made contact with the pedestrian at approximately 14 mph.” The company did not release a specific analysis of this crash.
eloquent words aren’t true.
Tao Te Ching – Verse 81
The problem is the cost.
<script><a href="/honeypot">Click Here!</a></script>
It would fool the dumber web crawlers.
Tricking it into writing malware isn't the big problem that I see.
It's things like prompt injections from fetching external URLs, it's going to be a major route for RCE attacks.
https://blog.trailofbits.com/2025/10/22/prompt-injection-to-...
There's plenty of things we should be doing to help mitigate these threats, but not all companies follow best practices when it comes to technology and security...
You have a customer facing LLM that has access to sensitive information.
You have an AI agent that can write and execute code.
Just image what you could do if you can bypass their safety mechanisms! Protecting LLMs from "social engineering" is going to be an important part of cybersecurity.
! [remote rejected] feature/ui-improvements -> feature/ui-improvements (Internal Server Error)
Edit: One minute after posting this it's working again.And yes, they're separate from the NTP Pool Project, which runs the actual servers, but the Network Time Foundation supports the software that billions of devices run on.
They support billions of devices and are only asking for $4,000 in donations per year.
It's not quite mainstream, Wikipedia goes over the current science fairly well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycorrhizal_network
It's controversial, but considering this study I think we should take these ideas a little more seriously.
One of the first things people would do if they really had control over their browsers is start blocking Google Ads. Google realized this early on, it's a huge potential threat to their main source of revenue, so they launched Chrome to influence, and eventually dominate, the browser market.
Google doesn't want users to have more control when it threatens their bottom line. It's part of why they've been trying to block ad-blockers.
Surveillance makes their jobs easier, so there's a kind of natural tendency towards authoritarianism. We've known about this for a long time, the 4th Amendment was created to put limits on government surveillance.
If you're wondering why the government would allow private businesses to spy on everybody when the government itself isn't allowed to, that's because this allows for the government to effectively bypass the 4th Amendment. The government spying on everybody is against the Constitution, but a private business spying on everybody and selling the data to the government is "legal".
If you're not allowed to criticize a person, you're in a cult. If you're not allowed to criticize the government, that's authoritarianism.
Being able to speak freely is supposed to be one of our core values, and when a business asks someone to forfeit that right, it's a sign there's something seriously wrong. You don't require someone to never speak ill of you unless you're planning on doing something they might speak ill about.
By my moral compass, the very act of requiring someone to never publicly say anything bad about you is itself unethical. It's psychopathic behavior, not something that should be normalized.
> At 3 days, EAM-containing samples exhibit increased overall porosity compared to the control, indicating an initial disruption in matrix densification. However, by 28 days, this effect diminishes, suggesting that hydration and subsequent microstructural stabilization mitigate the early porosity increase. Further analysis of pore size distribution (Figure 2F) shows that EAM incorporation leads to an increase in middle and large capillary mesopores, whereas coarse mesopores decrease, indicating a shift in the microstructure toward a more refined network. Despite these microstructural modifications, compressive strength measurements (Figure 2G) show that EAM incorporation does not compromise the structural integrity of cement. At 3 days, samples with higher EAM content exhibit a reduction in strength. However, by 28 days, strength recovery is observed, and EAM-containing samples exhibit a slight improvement compared to the control. This enhancement may be attributed to the formation of additional calcium carbonate, which contributes to matrix densification and mechanical reinforcement.
Unfortunately, that doesn't mean a whole lot, as many of the provisions live on in the USA Freedom Act.
The wording is confusing. Two provisions expired, not the entire Patriot Act.
https://web.archive.org/web/20250306093943/https://www.nytim...