kelnos

It sounds like you've defined "slop" as "anything an LLM produces". Seems unlikely you're going to get much agreement here.

I don't think that solves it. In your "example A", the compromised software can display that you voted for candidate A, but when doing the signing, sign the result that you voted for candidate B. There's no reason why the thing that it signs has to be the same thing that you see on the screen, and there's no way for you to verify it.

Perhaps, but why were the owners of the account then unable to sign into it after it was restored?

That's just your opinion, not fact.

I don't think anyone (including the original author) is saying that the look is inherent to software renderers. The point being made is that software renders of the day tended to do things in a particular way (because CPU speed was limited), and when some of these games gained hardware renderers, they did things in a different particular way, because more computationally-expensive (for a CPU) blending modes were more or less free on a GPU.

I do agree that the author may have missed the fact that they could have overridden texture blending modes via their GPU driver, and gotten a similar graphical look using the hardware renderer. But even that's a little uncertain; there are some other comments in other subthreads that point out that the hardware rendering modes on many of these older games also did other stuff that wasn't feasible with the software renderer, and those other things sometimes can't be tweaked/disabled. So if your goal is "exact same visual style as the software renderer", you might actually have to use the software renderer.

I think you're misunderstanding. No one is saying that a GPU isn't involved at all.

But if you rasterize your frames into a buffer using the CPU (and not OpenGL, Vulkan, Metal, D3D, etc.), and then scan that out on the GPU, that is indeed software rendering in the sense that matters here.

The idea that software rendering is impossible because the GPU owns the scanout buffers is just silly pedantry.

I don't think that's the rebuttal you think it is.

GP's argument is usually used in the sense of "if I hadn't done it, someone else would, so I might as well do it and the end result will be the same, except then I'll reap the rewards".

It's a crap justification for doing something unethical. But in many cases, even the unethical ones, it's also true, and I think in this case it is too. If the US had magically shut down every AI lab on day one, and banned all AI research, that wouldn't have stopped this train. Probably would have slowed it down, but not enough to really matter.

I don't like being interrupted, but I'm happy to answer a question when I'm at a good stopping/breaking point with whatever I'm working on.

OT, but my understanding is that recipe sites have long-winded blog posts in front of them because recipes alone are not copyrightable.

> It’s not meant to convince you of an argument quickly and effectively.

Part of the author's argument is that it doesn't do a good job of arguing at all, let alone quickly and effectively. It just inundates you with so many words and "facts" that people get bowled over by how "smart" it sounds.

That feels like a "no true scotsman"...

As a preventive measure, vegetarian/vegan diets are correlated with lower incidence of some types of cancer. There's a little bit of research showing that survivors of these same types of cancer may do better afterward (as in lower likelihood of recurrence) with a plant-based diet, but it's too soon to draw any conclusions there.

But there's nothing to suggest eliminating meat can help combat cancer or increase survival rates. And good nutrition -- including and especially protein -- is critical while fighting cancer. Switching to a plant based diet usually makes this harder for people.

Don't throw around stuff like this. It's pseudoscientific, at best.

> thank you for the downvote, whoever you are.

You're welcome.

Is there any research/literature on this? A couple years ago I read that the "correct" order was mouthwash -> floss -> brush.

> I could put zero effort into writing a quick post on some piece of programming knowledge

For starters, if you're writing something yourself, it's not "zero-effort". It might be low-effort, but you still put some effort into it. And low-effort doesn't mean worthless, as you illustrate ("but if someone needed that information...").

Consider that the refrain seems to be: "I won't put more energy reading something than you put into writing it". A "quick" post takes little energy to write, and little energy to read. That's fine!

The federal government has cancelled funding for a ton of genuinely useful scientific research because "o noes not the DEI monster". (Not to mention just putting the word "diversity" in your proposal has been grounds for rejection, even if it you're talking about, say "wifi antenna diversity".)

But sure, I'm glad now you can say whatever you want in your code comments. Seems like a good trade. /s

If you think that 192GB of VRAM on a video card that costs 3k€ is "pedestrian", I think you're a bit out of touch with the average consumer.

It's psychology. One option is a guaranteed upgrade bill that's due right now. The other one is a speculative what–if that may never happen.

And that's even assuming anyone who runs these sorts of systems have "hacked to turn on defrost mode" on their bingo cards at all, which probably isn't the case.

On top of that, upgrades carry risks of their own!

I doubt it matters. The power company also theoretically has to deal with houses where they coincidentally draw more from one side of the split than the other. But I suspect it all averages out, and the contribution of a couple plug-in panels in a bunch of houses won't change anything.

It depends on where you live. Some places will let you do everything yourself (though you may need to get permits), other places will let you mount the panels but not let you do the electrical, others will let you do the electrical but require an electrician to sign off on it, etc.

Depends on where you are. I can DIY the physical mounting parts of a rooftop install where I live (San Francisco), but a licensed electrician needs to do (or at least supervise) the wiring.

I do wonder if having an electrician come by after the fact to inspect it counts as "supervising", though.

Strange, I was looking (in SF) in the end of 2022 for a 4kW system and I was getting quotes of $20k before credits.

(My installer ended up flaking on me, and then I gave up because NEM 3.0 was coming too soon to find a fallback.)

> It still has tiny market reach. Very few people are going to invest the time needed to build a quality user experience for like 1000 users.

That doesn't make sense. Whenever someone wants to build something, they start with 0 users. They don't say "huh, I have 0 users, I'm not going to build a good product".

People who build things recognize that they won't get more users if they don't make their product better. If you have 1,000 users and you want 1,000,000 users, you work more, not less.

> * So generally it is impossible to leave Russia if you are not in top 10% by wealth, and it is almost impossible in Russia to get in those top 10% if you have conscience.*

I know or have heard about quite a few people not in that 10%, who were able to leave. Not sanctioned; they had to more or less sneak out. Now they're mostly living in various countries in SE Asia, where they've arrived with only what they could carry with them. The more fortunate/skilled among them have been able to do knowledge work online, but others have had to take on odd jobs and live fairly roughly.

And of course I've also read about Russians fleeing to Central Asian countries, as well as eastern Europe, and to other places.

Even regardless of who started these types of attacks, my view is that Ukraine is suffering an existential threat from a foreign invader, who started an unprovoked war. In that case, I'm personally fine with just about anything Ukraine does to protect themselves.

I get that we have rules of warfare that nations (sorta, mostly, at least when it suits them) agree on, but if the choices are between ceasing to exist and doing something the rules of war prohibit, I'd choose the latter every time. Maybe I wouldn't be able to live with myself afterward, but that's likely a small price to pay when balanced against the rest of my people who'd otherwise be dead or under the oppressive regime of an occupying force.

In this scheme of things "targeting data centers" doesn't trigger my concern-o-meter at all.

(On the other side of this, the Russian government is already reprehensible for starting this war, but any time they break the rules of warfare, that's an additional black mark on their reputation. They don't have to do any of this; they choose to, for Putin's own selfish, war-mongering reasons.)

> if your country's existence is threatened and your people are being killed you don't sit back and do nothing because you are scared it'll make the attacker unhappy.

Sure, but there are many different ways of making your attacker unhappy, and some of them might decrease your chances of winning, so you might not want to do those.

Not saying that's the case here (I don't think it is), but the concept is sound.

Preventing, no. But it was certainly a form of intimidation, even if (and I'm being very charitable here) they didn't intend it that way.

Cops coming to your door to ask, in a disapproving manner, why you're doing something... well, that's not a friendly visit from the people with guns who are allowed to deprive you of your freedom.

Yes, and people -- including cops -- do not have an expectation of privacy in public. It is entirely legal for a private citizen to be recording the movements of cops.

Then the cops then decide to stop by his house to talk about it... that's intimidation and bullying by someone with a gun and the force of the government behind them.

It was, but he talks about Flock-related situations in the US a lot in the video.

I'm right there with you, but I think we are in the minority. There aren't enough of us to sustain software development unless LLMs get good enough so this doesn't matter.

I think you underestimate the difference between white collar and blue collar work. The trades are not for everyone, and it's not a simple substitution to just pick another career track and be fine with it.

There was an article posted here recently that dives into this in more detail, and was eye-opening for me: https://asteriskmag.com/issues/15/so-you-think-you-could-be-...