hau

I don't understand his reasoning behind this point. Previous productivity advancements in history didn't free us, because technology seemingly has little to do with this. Let's say AI will do your job - will you be free from responsibility of daunting task or free from opportunity to afford next rent payment? What's the difference? Why would we spend more time on X if X becomes cheaper? Is there even a single living person who got freedom through his job being automated except automata owners?

I can confirm everything you said about state of IT industry, it matches my experience.

Our team is in process movingto Bulgaria thanks to BESCO (write letter to them right now if Bulgaria is an option for you). We are getting some help acquiring visas fast, but getting tickets out of Russia is harder with every minute (literally). We are leaving all our lives behind and fleeing in shock, hoping one day to be able to return, to help those who couldn't leave.

Stay strong.

Author's biography listed right at the end of the article.

My summary of claims: Opensource AI is too dangerous and can't be left as it is. It's scary that everyone can just create AI and we should make laws regarding this glaring issue. Proprietary AI is more accountable, transparent and easier to fix than opensource AI. Opensource AI is more bias-prone by it's nature.

No arguments presented. It's just that. Everyone can change opensource AI and add biases. Unlike companies, who are accountable and will easily fix it if something goes wrong. Tech is too powerful for simpletons to wield, we should restrict it.

What makes you say that reality is consistent? How would we know?

>"That's all. That's the difficulty. That's why quantum mechanics can't seem to be imitable by a local classical computer."

I don't think argument is about efficiency. "a classical computer can perfectly simulate a quantum system/computer" is not explicitily there, it's an argument against that. It seems to me you're saying anything that's not strictly proving BQP > BPP supports something else.

Richard Feynman describes such computation, that produces incorrect results on classic computer and correct one on quantum in "Simulating Physics with Computers"[0]. He follows one physical experiment detailing every step from start to finish and how it converges to incorrect result on classical computer.

[0] - https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02650179

What is the significance and implications of such condemnation?

>more companies would be supporting

Why would any company support free software to begin with? Sounds like shareholders got duped. One wise man once said "They're a publicly traded company with a fiduciary to operate in the shareholder's best interest not be some moral beacon of truth."

>How is it moral to build

Didn't hurt anyone. Built something new. Many people found it useful. More good in the world. Non-zero sum.

Nothing prevents shareholders to pursue ethical goals or at least make an ethical decisions once in a while. Somehow you assume their best interest necessarily is in conflict with morals or truth but I don't see it. Decision to implement unjust ruling is unusual. It's not surprising for Facebook to do so, I agree. But it's not a rule for a publicly traded company by a virtue of fiduciary responsibilities.

It's actually really good but I don't get the feel of wonder after all those years together anymore :) Huge db and feature scope definitely keep it away from any particular completeness despite size and age of the project. Hope to see something more focused @next.

To be fair sync feature is marked as unsafe to use in production in documentation.

After working with TypeORM in a quite few projects I can tell that there're a lot of things that are wrong with it. And TypeORM absolutely doesn't provide "full feature support" for all 8 databases. Even some basic things are missing, like joins on delete sql queries in query builder. Simple 'set' mysql datatype support was missing and I had to add it myself. When it comes to mapping and data modeling, things are OK most of the time but it breaks when it comes to somewhat non-basic stuff like STI. Don't get me started on bugs. Any reasonable alternatives and orm developments are welcome and Prisma2 doesn't take away anything, it's a free software.

KeeShare comes with keepassxc allows for sharing secrets with per user control. It's somewhat convoluted but preferable to sharing whole database.

https://github.com/keepassxreboot/keepassxc/blob/develop/doc...

Thanks, that looks cool.

Why arrays are preferable over m2m tables? What so special about pg arrays that makes anything but them inferior in "tagging" case? I genuinely don't get it.

Your strong statement about postgres doesn't sound right to me. You can't use an array values as foreign keys. Array column wouldn't be my first choice even it could do this: you're limited and constricted in usage overall for a little gain if any. Which imageboard/booru engines use array column for tags?

Quantum computers are capable of computing things which aren't classically-computable. For a clear explanation I recommend "Simulating Physics with Computers" by Richard Feynman. It presents one example of such computation and step-by-step walkthrough. An excerpt: "That's why quantum mechanics can't seem to be imitable by a local classical computer".

Humans and many other animals have a persistent world model. My eyes+brain reckons things don't disappear instantly even when I don't have a direct line of sight.

We bought a few Ryzens with Vega8 for our devs on linux and it was a mistake. Unfortunately integrated graphics glitched horribly and it required us to find right set of kernel flags and features to disable. After encountering bug with amdgpu module randomly giving up, we just used discrete gpu. I don't feel comfortable relying on their gpus after this experience but cpus are undeniably good.

Nim has something similar in the works, barely implemented.

https://nim-lang.org/docs/manual_experimental.html#taint-mod...

You can't use some claim as an argument and then deny any discussion of it. Especially when your claim is extraordinary.

You should really do thorough examination of the article it's really short. They did examine hardware both in production and already sold to Apple and Amazon samples.

Not necessarily agree with grandparent.

>There is zero harm to others downstream

Draconian IP laws and content filters and DCMA abuse and cost of complying is harm. DRM software itself already has been proved to be a security problem even when handled by the biggest of tech corps.

These costs are externalized for copyright holders. These costs are real because those things already do happen to people. Unlike these existing costs, opportunities lost are only hypothetical. Saying that we should abolish IP is ridiculous but so is claiming that current laws and industry is reasonable in their reach for media control.

We should also consider the fact that someone not being familiar with a piece of art and not creating art being unable to use other work is harm. Though these costs are on par with hypothetically lost profits and hypothetically lost creators in their ephemerality.

>a product that was created in express reliance on the copyright system

This system severely overreaching and limiting freedom of people without showing a connection between implemented laws and technologies and the ability to produce. It may rely on some parts of system but not the other. It's up to copyright lobby to demonstrate if it does at all.

>It's precisely because this scarcity is artificial that it's moral.

So is price collusion and human torture. If drm and music are to grow on trees it wouldn't change a thing about the moral aspect of the thing. We're free to decide on the morality of copyright enforcement without looking at its nature.

Didn't Gibson profited enough from their acquired IP? Surely they have to compete at some point and not just own idea forever doing nothing but moving shareholders property. Most importantly, engineers and idea-makers behind original solution made more than enough profit since CakeWalk and Oberheim were produced. Poor Gibson can't buy right IP at the right time so they can do nothing and not make anything new - who cares.

>some of them might risk it for some new idea that if not received well bankrupts them personally

Owning IP exclusively forever doesn't change this at all. If IP is good then you can defend it for a some time to make profit on edge.

>It's happening all the time

Not with synthesizers/software/ee developers because of IP expiring too soon.

>now imagine getting a perfect clone maker to the mix, selling "legends" for cheap that might be good enough for 90% of users;

Imagine what all these people could do now! They could produce new innovative things.

Imagine Gibson was shit and would make shit new software that would cost as much as possible and own IP forever. That's easy to imagine because IP rights holders pushing hard for this change. That's sucks for everyone but Gibson since they get $ doing nothing. They cn also easily fire anyone involved in this innovation and prevent them from working with anything similar.

Sitting on an idea indefinitely is not a good prospect either. Original developers knew that IP would expire and still produced original design. There're always risks, originality has some protection but so is availability and freedom of innovating at manufacturing, freedom to compete at costs. Original things can't be plenty if you can't base your work on something that someone made before. These synthesisers are based on complex previous developments, and those were an IP once. And surely those devs wouldn't end up on the street, that's ridiculous.

Nix uses it's own specific language. Guix uses Schema. Last time I checked Nix its interface was scattered into a bunch of tools. Nix is pretty neat though but not without weaknesses.

Can you back up such strong and broad claims with something?

Given the relationship between eul author and deadlines it won't happen in 2018. Author also promised to open-source eul itself at first but last statement is "I'm not 100% sure it's going to be possible."[0]

Current state of eul app also hinting that most likely nothing of value would be lost if this language won't be open-sourced.

[0] - https://github.com/eul-im/eul/issues/45#issuecomment-3356427...

The result of printing itself is not discussed and smallest amount of time reserved for showing it off in video at 480p. Impressive printer build overall but really lacking description of unique point of this one - resulting ceramic product. What can be seen is still interesting and implies potential for ceramic printers since source material is easily obtained.

That's also the smallest size and lowest contrast font I've ever seen in article. Impossible to read.