nicce

This looks great. Quite new one, hopefully will be maintained.

Thanks. I am already using this, it seems to be the best so far. But I feel something is still missing from there by the usability aspect. It also uses NextJS which I don't know what to think about...

I just wish there would be more pure JMAP email clients. But maybe soon!

> Personally, I do expect SpaceX to face consequences in the years to come.

Probably only and only when AOC or someone else from Bernie's camp gets to be president. Otherwise, unlikely.

I even forgot that it exist. I tried it many times but it was not good enough. Eventually I switched to Zed since that was better. Probably Zed killed it.

Some repo owners just review code that others submit, and don't write anything themselves. If the review process stays the same, does it matter? The fault is not generating the code with AI, rather, with faulty review process or not caring about the code, or not reading it. A different problem.

Based on translating their Chinese text on Firefox, it says "per card":

> The current service throughput of a single cluster is 155 trillion tokens per day, and the overall revenue is $38 per hour (at the lowest price) per card.

With Kagi translate (best), it says GPU

> A single cluster currently serves 155 trillion tokens per day, generating overall revenue of $38 per GPU per hour (at off-peak electricity rates).

https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/2095560295930508953

It is not even Russia in this case. Just look what Meta and Trump and friends have been doing

What are the benefits of jj if in the end everything is still on git backend?

And probably OLED or something close to that

Without an account, you can’t even properly use your freezer

The main issue is that the attention economy and social pressure are so hard to break. People keep using WhatsApp because it is convenient and everyone is there. There are no other reasons.

The best games when you were around 10-12 years old.

> Or you build a cartel of apirin sellers to do some price fixing.

They are really trying to do that by getting that regulatory capture

> 1) If a firm spends $99k on compute to replace a $100k engineer and produces 5x the output, how is that not a 5x increase in aggregate labor productivity?

I think they are saying that with 99k pure compute you are able replace 100k engineer with equal output. Or that is the goal of the AI companies. It is worse for them if you get more productivity.

There is named entity in the end, and "we" statement. But yeah, I was speaking in general, not so specifically about this page. It is better than most who do this.

There is nothing I dislike more than people using AI to generate tens of pages in text and then expect people to read them, when they did not read them themselves.

Some people also have tried the paid new feature prioritization where it later lands for everyone. I think it worked in some projects but project must have been really good otherwise.

Not particularly referencing to this link, but usually severity is made more severe than it actually is. One kind of sensationalism is usually used.

Depends how much involment there is for the end result. Does using traditional, digital paint tools make people artists?

They excpect fame and may make things look worse than they are

It is great if you have enough RAM. I have enough to run it, but not enough for prefix cache. 27b is so much faster with long term tasks.

I don’t think particular project is great example for that.

> Whatever they know after training is all they'll ever know.

Feeding enough source material as context can absolutely make them better.

By definition, it could be more secure if people actually would be able to inspect it. Is it regardless the most secure? Hard to say. GrapheneOS is quite secure, probably more.

As a long time iOS user, I just switched to GrapheneOS as the lack of sideloading, after 8 years, became too much pain.

And in EU, they just were able to lobby all this information to be classified.

I believe that they chose assembly in order to diff against real projects and then see if those real projects have bugs.

The idea is that nobody has chance to have prior knowledge to identify or research the bug until it is generally possible to apply the fix immediately. If someone leaks the patch beforehand, others can inspect the bug and start exploiting it in the wild, while others have no chance to apply the patch.

Whether someone just leaked the CVE numbers or just ”there is a big bug in PHP” - that should not be enought to accelerate finding that bug. But other information that pins the bug for specific property or feature makes it easier to find and race against patching starts.

And at that point you don’t really know if someone really found it or not, since only few big organisations can collect that much data to detect successful exploiting. And most ”PoC”:s in the wild were credible-looking but vibecoded mess that did nothing what sources claimed.

Until there is absolute evidence that exploitation happens in the wild, succesfully, you don’t leak the patch or bug details beforehand.

In this case, the area where the bug is in PHP, leaked partially, but apparently there was no enough evidence that it was exploited succesfully or if any of the PoCs in the wild actually worked properly. So patch or related detailed information was not released before the initial schedule.

All journals will be brute-forced to death. Not the greatest time to be Phd student. And many people have no shame. They just use agents to make whole papers. Those who don’t, will double-guess their life choices.