I remember being very productive in a team of developers and locking the screen wasn't necessary because everyone had full trust in each other and we shared a common goal. No time for nonsense. Obviously this changed when the corporate developers arrived, teaching the ways of the professional. We also learned to save hours of programming with weeks-long projects.
Best case it won't make a difference and trust is the norm again (imo). Even if artificial super intelligence will be a thing, it will drown in the swamp that is communication just like all super intelligent humans do.
This is insufficient for the human authors but seems ideal for Anthropic, who now have established a financial moat for others to train their ai on those works (except for Chinese companies, which don't care either way).
Aside from the sentence "How many experiences continue to consume us because they were never allowed to finish burning?", I'm not sure what to make of this article. But the book it mentions, "Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind", seems worth taking a look at (an older one, not a promotion).
In the Latin phrasing, which they likely used, the word "Imperium" appears. Good point. Still, the original meaning of "Imperium" was slightly different than what it is today. So my point goes more like this: The Germans didn't claim to found an empire in the modern sense, so it's not that surprising that Voltaire pointed out, it isn't one.
Fair point, the original sentence is French and not English. Both are closer to Latin than German, so the mistranslation might be more on the German side.
It's true that the "Heiliges Römisches Reich" (literal translation "Holy Roman Realm") considered itself the successor of the Roman Republic. The English referred to the Roman Republic by what it was in the modern sense: an empire. Therefore its self-proclaimed successor got translated as "Holy Roman Empire", which, unlike the original, it is not.
Voltaire gets quoted so often without ever mentioning that the German word "Reich" has a different meaning than the loose translation "empire". A "Reich" is not necessarily an empire, so no news here.
In the first round I struggled to notice if I missed. The frog punching back would be a good indicator. And I wouldn't feel so guilty for punching a pacifist frog.
As an outsider the accusation "Canvassing" seems like a double edged sword. Similar to Reddits "Brigading" but without the hostile intention. It's not clear to me, how Wikipedia prevents this rule from being used inappropriately to silence people.
For a limited amount of time I appreciated the level of detail in the article, hoping it would give me more insight, until it exhausted me. I think those two ideas are real takeaways: "Knowing is not doing" and "What can we trust AI to do?". Still, could have been said with a more concise text and maybe a follow up about the details.
> So for that entire class of packages this change makes them safe.
This is misleading. The change addresses one important attack vector. But if one runs the application directly on the host for development, if the package is imported like pointed out in the other comments or the package intends to steal user credentials from production, it is far from "being safe". Safer, but still needs scrutiny.